Well, it was no surprise to see the Whitehouse gloating today about the failure of the House to pass a veto-proof S-Chips bill. The new press secretary actually stated that the vote was still another victory for the poor children in our country.
You know, it truly amazes me that the president of the United States and his lackies do not even know who the S-Chips legislation helps. Bush himself started the misinformation campaign when he claimed that the S-Chips program was for "poor" children. Of course, I don't think that Mr. Bush has had too much contact with poor children since he is from a wealthy family. But now, even his press secretary shows her ignorance by repeating the same nonsense.
Let's help these people out. "Poor children" are covered already by Medicaid. Got it? The S-Chips program covers those individuals who can't afford the outrageous premiums that insurance companies charge the rest of us.
The program also covers children who could not obtain private insurance due to pre-existing conditions which, of course, the insurance industry avoids like the plague. Anyone with a brain could not have missed this points if they watched any television news the last few weeks. With the exception of the Fox News folks who parrot Bush-talk ad nauseam, every network has described the program correctly.
It was encouraging that several House Republicans did vote against the president on this issue. While it is tempting to join in the strong condemnation of the Bush position on this subject as certain Democrats did, I believe that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's approach will more likely lead to a veto-proof bill in the near future.
If you watched the CBS News or Countdown tonight, you saws that an incredible 84% of Americans favor the S-Chips program and that 67% would be willing to pay higher taxes for the program.
I sent my own Congressman a message supporting this legislation but he's about as likely to vote for the bill as Rush Limbaugh is to praise it. However, the Republican party surely has the sense to figure out that this is still another nail in their coffins for the 2008 Election year.
I just keep asking myself: How can this be America? As Mrs. Pelosi pointed out, what we spend in a few weeks in Iraq would pay for the increase in the S-Chips program for a full year! These are our children and grandchildren we're talking about for God's sake. While Bush runs around saying he's protecting "poor children", he's really just protecting the private insurance industry.
I think that 14 votes can be obtained with a few small changes in this bill. Let's all tell our Congressmen and Congresswomen that we really do care about all of the children in this country.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
HERE WE GO AGAIN!
I'm sitting here listening to Pulizer-prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh (I've also seen the name spelled Hirsch) talking to Terry Gross on NPR's "Fresh Air" about the Cheney, uh, Bush administration's plan to attack Iran. Although Mr. Hersh is one of the finest journalists on U.S. involvement in the Mideast, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Cheney and Bush having been pushing for a military attack on Iran for months, if not years.
For the last couple of years, the American public has been fed a steady line that Iran is "close to developing a nuclear weapon." Just as Iraq's WMD's turned out to be a load of manure, the intelligence on Iran's nuke program became less and less persuasive. In fact, the majority of the American public just didn't buy the "Iran nuke" capabilities at all. So, typical of the Cheney-Bush boys, when one "justification" for pre-emptive strikes against countries does not work, we've now been given a second reason for an attack: "We need to attack Iran because they support terrorists in Iraq."
Hersh points out in his article in The New Yorker that tactical nuclear attacks on Iran are unlikely. Instead, Cheney-Bush will most likely push conventional "surgical" strikes against specific targets such as the "Revolutionary Guard" in the country.
But, based on the Cheney-Bush administration's history of lying to the American public and the world in general, how do we know that the U.S. military won't use nukes.?
What Hersh also points out in his article and on Fresh Air is that there will have to be a ground force sent to Iran although it won't be a large. However, with our military, especially the Army and Marines, already spread out to the point of breaking, how can Cheney-Bush even consider this insane idea.
Hersh also makes a valid point that our diplomacy with Iran goes something like this: "Get your act straight, or we're going to blow the hell out of you." Hmm. Some diplomacy. Given the fact that we have actually just completed a successful diplomatic breakthough with one of the other members of the "Axis of Evil" countries (North Korea), why in the hell can't Cheney-Bush at least try talking to Iran?
At 60 years of age, I find myself becoming more and more disappointed in what passes as leadership in this nation. Not only are we "led" by a stoneage mentality president, our national media, with a few exceptions, are also following in perfect lockstep with this insanity. One of the exceptions is MSNBC and Keith Obermann in particular. ABC and CBS, on the other hand, have been showing us daily what a bad guy the Iranian president is. Just as almost all of the media practically acted as cheerleaders for our invasion of Iraq, those same reporters are frequently not asking the right questions in regard to Iran.
What are those questions? Well, for one thing, why do Cheney and Bush think that the U.S. should be the police force for the world? Secondly, with all the "bad" guys in the world, why do Cheney and Bush always want to attack Mideast countries? Could it be that "oil" is the reason for nearly all of Cheney-Bush thinking?
Folks, we've been here before. Just a few years ago, our president talked us into a war that we should never have fought. His advisors said the war would be over in a few months. Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" and then allowed several thousand Americans to die or suffer life-long physical and mental injuries. We were told that "freedom would be given to the people of Iraq. We were told that the infrastructure of Iraq would include improvements in schools, utilities and civil rights for women. NONE OF THAT HAS HAPPENED.
Please, let's call Cheney-Bush's hand on this nonsense of still another war. This will only end up being another way to kill Americans so that the military-industrial complex will be able to continue to make billions of dollars.
I, for one, am sick and tired of listening to Cheney-Bush lobby for attacking other countries while they veto health care for U.S. citizens, allow our infrastructure to collapse, and take our political freedoms away from us in the name of "anti-terror."
For the last couple of years, the American public has been fed a steady line that Iran is "close to developing a nuclear weapon." Just as Iraq's WMD's turned out to be a load of manure, the intelligence on Iran's nuke program became less and less persuasive. In fact, the majority of the American public just didn't buy the "Iran nuke" capabilities at all. So, typical of the Cheney-Bush boys, when one "justification" for pre-emptive strikes against countries does not work, we've now been given a second reason for an attack: "We need to attack Iran because they support terrorists in Iraq."
Hersh points out in his article in The New Yorker that tactical nuclear attacks on Iran are unlikely. Instead, Cheney-Bush will most likely push conventional "surgical" strikes against specific targets such as the "Revolutionary Guard" in the country.
But, based on the Cheney-Bush administration's history of lying to the American public and the world in general, how do we know that the U.S. military won't use nukes.?
What Hersh also points out in his article and on Fresh Air is that there will have to be a ground force sent to Iran although it won't be a large. However, with our military, especially the Army and Marines, already spread out to the point of breaking, how can Cheney-Bush even consider this insane idea.
Hersh also makes a valid point that our diplomacy with Iran goes something like this: "Get your act straight, or we're going to blow the hell out of you." Hmm. Some diplomacy. Given the fact that we have actually just completed a successful diplomatic breakthough with one of the other members of the "Axis of Evil" countries (North Korea), why in the hell can't Cheney-Bush at least try talking to Iran?
At 60 years of age, I find myself becoming more and more disappointed in what passes as leadership in this nation. Not only are we "led" by a stoneage mentality president, our national media, with a few exceptions, are also following in perfect lockstep with this insanity. One of the exceptions is MSNBC and Keith Obermann in particular. ABC and CBS, on the other hand, have been showing us daily what a bad guy the Iranian president is. Just as almost all of the media practically acted as cheerleaders for our invasion of Iraq, those same reporters are frequently not asking the right questions in regard to Iran.
What are those questions? Well, for one thing, why do Cheney and Bush think that the U.S. should be the police force for the world? Secondly, with all the "bad" guys in the world, why do Cheney and Bush always want to attack Mideast countries? Could it be that "oil" is the reason for nearly all of Cheney-Bush thinking?
Folks, we've been here before. Just a few years ago, our president talked us into a war that we should never have fought. His advisors said the war would be over in a few months. Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" and then allowed several thousand Americans to die or suffer life-long physical and mental injuries. We were told that "freedom would be given to the people of Iraq. We were told that the infrastructure of Iraq would include improvements in schools, utilities and civil rights for women. NONE OF THAT HAS HAPPENED.
Please, let's call Cheney-Bush's hand on this nonsense of still another war. This will only end up being another way to kill Americans so that the military-industrial complex will be able to continue to make billions of dollars.
I, for one, am sick and tired of listening to Cheney-Bush lobby for attacking other countries while they veto health care for U.S. citizens, allow our infrastructure to collapse, and take our political freedoms away from us in the name of "anti-terror."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)