Good ad! I especially like the comparison between one week in Iraq and children's health care.

Oh I like this! So you have a problem with the bona-fides of a particular SCHIP recipient, well here's another, and another, and another. Let us know when you've seen enough.

IgnoranceIsNotBliss @ 3:

Que rightwing attack in 3....2....1....And you know it will happen.

Then why let up?

Blow up in the right wings' faces? No, no how could that be? Why, I heard John Roberts on CNN saying the Democrats should have "vetted" the Frost story more.

(I sent a more explicit version of: If John Roberts would unplug his face from Mitch McConnell's (R-Tobacco) anatomy he'd be in a better position to report the news.)

If someone could figure out how to end this fu*king war one week earlier than planned this program could be financed. Of course if this fu*king war had never been started by the insane in Washington, financing this program wouldn't even have to be discussed.

The insanity of everything right now is just too much to comprehend.

This is what is needed to battle the reichwing smear machine: More courageous people who are willing to step forward and say to Malkin, Limbaugh, et al - "Bring it on, bitches!" They can't smear everybody - though that doesn't mean they won't try.

You'd think they would try to be a little less obvious about how much they hate the poor and how much they hate using tax money for what it was intended for.
Do you get that the populace is financing an endless conservotard kegger yet? And no one else is invited.

Dr. Squid @ 9:

I can see it already: The Wilkersons' trip to Washington from Florida proves that their story isn't what it seems to be - they should stay put.

Again, in conservative-world - if you're not completely destitute, you're not deserving.

And in a conservative world, if you ARE completely destitute, then you're just lazy and not deserving of help either.

Dr. Squid @ 9:

I can see it already: The Wilkersons' trip to Washington from Florida proves that their story isn't what it seems to be - they should stay put.

Again, in conservative-world - if you're not completely destitute, you're not deserving.

Correction -

In conservative world - If your not a multi-national corporation, you're not deserving.

It may "blow up" in their faces, but it still won't override a veto....which is the point, remember?

Every time that adorable girl is seen on TV, another goopers political career goes up in flames.

I think the ad is effective. It also puts the argument in perspective. President Bush is willing to spend billions of dollars on an abstract and unpopular war thousands of miles from home. He's willing to put American soldiers and our country at risk.

Yet he isn't willing to help children. What could be more clear than that?

Every parent should be outraged.

It was said in an earlier thread but bears constant repetition. Republicans are not pro life.

Pro war.
Pro punishment.
Pro torture.
Pro death.
But never pro life.

Gee wiz...what a bunch of worthless, slackers, sucking up all the good blood from the hard working, god-fearing American righteous right! Don't these darned socialists know that they need to sell everything they own, wander the streets naked, work 87.5 jobs/day before ever, ever asking for governmental assistance? I mean that (whore) Michelle Malkin would, right? As would Rush Limbaugh (except when he is trying to purchase the necessary drugs in order to get some wood, if you know what I mean...)

Heil Bush!

Hey, you know what'd be funny...if the Wilkersons were attacked by the right for "irresponsibly putting their child in the public eye."

I can pretty much imagine these bastards' reaction:

"do you want the terrorists to win?", "do you want out country to lose"?, "do you want Toyota to take over the US"?.........or do you want to help this kid?"

"whose side are you???!!!!!!!!!" (add maniac grin and foam coming from their mouths for enhanced dramatic effect)

If Congress pases SCHIP then the socilists and terorists win. An economically, educationally and emotionally impoverished populace is the only bulwark against terorists and there socilists friends.

"We know SCHIP works...Why doesn't George Bush?"

Oh, maybe because he's a spoiled, meglomaniacal, half-witted sociopath.

Hmmm. YA THINK?

That girl successfully made it out of the womb and at this point is just a drag on the economy. Those liberal "child-nazis" never produce wealth, only look for a hand out. Also, she's probably faking that disease.

Sincerly,
Rush Limbaugh

Johnny2Bad @ 37:

Gotugye @ 34:

If Congress pases SCHIP then the socilists and terorists win. An economically, educationally and emotionally impoverished populace is the only bulwark against terorists and there socilists friends.

Is this a spoof??? Cuz if it is...its a doozy. Love the dropped consonants and misspellings. Why you'd think an "educationally impoverished" idiot wrote it. Good work.

My sarcasm detector blew up when I processed the original post. You may need to upgrade your version.

redratio1 @ 20:

It may "blow up" in their faces, but it still won't override a veto....which is the point, remember?

It's only going to sink your reich-wing party further into the minority....which is the point, remember?

Reich-wingers only believe in the sanctity and protection of "life" from conception to birth. After that, you're on your own suckers.

Huh, I thought the Right Wing is pro life and Pro Family!?
Go Figure..

jr @ 11:

The righties love giving another 92 million to Erik Prince but not a dime to kids with cancer or were in car accidents

I have 92 million for Erik Prince. 92 MILLION FUCKING YEARS IN PRISON!

Why do all these kids think they deserve help? I want our tax dollar$ going to Iraq so I can afford to buy gasoline made from our oil that happens to be in Iraq. I want our tax dollar$ lining the pockets of big oil. I want our tax dollar$ going to pharmaceutical CEOs for bonuses. Where do these kids get off asking for medical help? Their lucky to be living in America.

Are they serious? That's the most disgraceful thing I've ever read.

I suppose that Mark Hemingway thinks that she should have had an abortion...no, that can't be right, he's pro-life, right?

That's an incredibly effective political statement in support of socialized medicine.

I view this whole SCHIP discussion as a real positive, including Bush's veto of it. Finally, all the stories of how really out-of-reach health care is for us regular, middle class folks are beginning to pour out of us and into our collective knowledge. It started with Moore's Sicko, and now the SCHIP debate.

It's beginning to look more and more as if socialized health care is on the horizon for Americans. When we finally get it, a huge burden will have been lifted off the backs of our bedrock communities and our workforce, and we will finally have joined with the other modern nations that don't consider it to be civilized when its citizenry can't afford health care.

The rethug mantra: it's okay to trash Democrats kids. Our kids all pay for their health insurance. Yeh, right!
I would love to see the statistics on what states get the most S CHIP money. I am willing to wager it is the red states. How about it? Where can we get those statistics?

jgr4 @ 59:

When health care is so expensive, and insurance is so hard to get, that a parent can't change jobs, go back to school, move to a different town, stay home to take care of the kids - when all of your life decisions are dictated by fear of losing your health insurance - that in itself is an argument for a national health plan.

That is the health care industry standing in the way of our constitutionally protected right to pursuit of happiness. It is health care slavery.

It's not doing just that: it's standing between us and an effective 21st century economy.

See, the "right" wins either way. The Frosts are "rich" and abusing the system and the Wilkersons are irresponsibly poor. It's their fault that they are poor.

The fact is, the right doesn't want this program EVEN TO HELP POOR FAMILIES. They hate all government programs, ESPECIALLY if it helps the underprivaledged.

This is their strength when talking to their base, a small minority of Americans. But it is their utter weakness when talking to the rest of America - the rest of America knows that not everyone can be rich. We know that America is the "land of opportunity" but not everyone can and will achieve the "American dream." Some people will be janitors, minimum wage workers, or hourly salary workers and not everyone can be a CEO.

The right pretends that it is your "fault" if you are an auto mechanic and not a mid-level manager with a 401k. The rest of America knows better. Let the right trash the Frosts and Wilkersons. They just expose ther ignorance of how America really works everytime they open up their mouths.

So basically the wingnuts think that we should be prisoners to intolerable work environments so that we have health insurance. Very nice. I'm sure that would have made pregnancy much, much easier. Oh, that's right, stress has no actual effects, I totally forgot. Honestly, I had to take my current job because of my need for insurance--and I'm lucky in that it is a good job, but it's only temporary, and in August I have to go searching again. I'm now uninsurable as an individual because of my use of said insurance in the past, and I'm certain that had they used their work insurance plan for Bethany's heart condition, she would have been trapped in that job for eternity, and her bosses would have known it.

What health insurance has become is a form of "soft" indentured servitude--a weapon used to limit the movement of people and the pursuit of happiness guaranteed us in our nation's founding documents. A worker can be maltreated, underpaid, or otherwise threatened with termination, with their sick child or own medical needs used as a weapon for the capricious egos and money hunger of the highers-up. It's disgusting.

The White House, with the support of many conservative commentators, has endorsed passage of the S-Chump bill that would forgive privileged individuals and corporations for making irresponsible decisions at the behest of the President. The new bill was inspired by the terrible ordeal suffered by Scooter Libby, after he irresponsibly decided to break the law by lying to federal investigators. The S-Chump bill would provide insurance against legal action for communications companies that may have violated the law. Critic complain that the bill so will exploit the generosities of hard-working tax payers and could lead to the decline in the value of accountability.

Dr. Matt @ 41:

redratio1 @ 20:

It may "blow up" in their faces, but it still won't override a veto....which is the point, remember?

It's only going to sink your reich-wing party further into the minority....which is the point, remember?

Ummmmmm, I'm not a Republican. But thanks for the insult...

The question is: What is the backup plan come Thursday's vote failure?

MN USA @ 68:

So because her parents may not be perfect, deny her health care? Is that their message?

Partly. The message is also that the working class must put up with any shit whatsoever to get its health insurance. Notice how Bethany's mom is blamed for the situation because she left a miserable job?

Message to Mark Hemmingway from God:

I was watching you when you said that. You thought I wasn't but I was. You disappoint Me. At the end of your days, I think I'm going to exile you to hell for that little piece of work of yours.

Message ends.

What happened to personal responsibility? Should we provide free vet care to all the pets of the nation because blaming the owners and telling them to pony up is wrong?

Oh hell, lets just have national healthcare! How bad could it be? Oh... wait... Canadian mothers have to come down HERE to have their babies... And patients are denied surgery because the government says its costing too much and bed space has to be cut...

Where does this entitlement to health care come from? WHERE? Is it enshrined in the constitution? Did ole' Thomas Jefferson say "yep... and health care... right behind the post office on the budget!" "Think of the kids!" people cry and I am... since one generation raised to think the government owes them something automactically begets another.

What right does Bethany have to my paycheck? I work and put myself though college. Don't I need that money too since I don't have healthcare? I spend my money frugally and save against possible emergency. I don't go out drinking and partying. Why does my hard-earned money go to some family that refuses to make the tough decisions. Am I less entitled because my grilfriend and I decided to be smart and not get married/start a family? Why does their decision to have a child without the resources to support it automactically make the problem everyone else's?

Maybe the child could learn a useful lesson about responsibility if she grew up without having the government doled out money to see a doctor everytime she has a cold. I haven't seen a doctor in years for any of my aches and pains and problems... Its amazing, if you pause before medicating yourself, how the body heals.

"People should have to stay in a job the hate because it offers healthcare" Oh BOO HOO! My father endured 21 years in the Navy so that he and his wife could raise their sons without worried about what would happen if an accident. He tolerated officers with their heads up their &% because he loved his children more than whether he was happy all the time. I did some time in the reserves and children would be about the only way I'd tolerate the occasional retarded officer I met. I just don't have that kind of patience.

Besides, if we have SCHIP, where do we stop? I want a new car since my pos didge stratus leaks brake oil, among siz dozen other problems. But I can't afford a new car... or even another old one... I know! How about all the achievers, the people who saved their money, made their choices carefulyl and with wisdom, pay for my new car. Cuz I need one... Yeah. And while I'm at it, I need healthcare, even though I don't see doctors except for physicals for my job. Yeah, workign at a country club is stressful and intolerable? Go join the Navy... Alittle exposure will make you realize your job ain't so bad after all.

I'm digusted. And finally. SCHIP is unconstitutional.... yep... government is only suppose to provide for defense and regulate interstate commerce, among a few other things (like a nation postal system and the like) What's the matter with her state picking up the tab, since it obviously couldn't educate her or her parents about how to teach a child alittle independence and personal responsibility... Where is her state at now to pick up the pieces of its failed education system for not teaching that when 1+1=2 and you need 3 to get what you want, you're going to have to wait until you can 1+1+1.

But I guess bringing the constitution into a room that cheers on SCHIP obviously means their states didn't teach them well either... Probably spent too much time on "sensitivity training" and "world cultures".

After reading Bob's diatribe, I checked on just one of the rambled "facts". The one about Canadian mothers coming to give birth in the US. Now I live in the Southwest so I know all about Mexican mothers crossing the border to give birth in the US so their kids will be American (mainly for education and job opportunities), but I hadn't heard about hordes of Canadian mothers crossing our Northern border. Turns out that there is 1 case of an identical quadruple birth. Space and a medical team was lined up, but there were some other unexpected preemie births. No one Canadian hospital had enough space for all 4, so a US hospital was found to take them. To use this example of a single incident and present it as a common occurrence is dishonest at best.

Piren @ 75:

Wow, Bob, I don't know where to start. Since compassion and the common good are not considerations for you, here's another good reason for single payer: get the profit out of health care, remove the responsibility for providing insurance from our employers, and they become more competitive on the world market against industrialized nations that do provide health care for their citizens. Jobs, Bobbie! Jobs with living wages. With jobs come personal responsibility, which does seem to be your hot button.

Compasion and good will eh? take profit out of health care? Two points...

One, when taxes where down, government was reduced, and people were working, charitable donations for those "down and out" exceeded all the funds available to the poor just ten years later during the 90s boom while Clinton was in office... So if you are about to insist that government can do more with less by paying government employees (w/ healthcare benefits) what working moms and dads and teens do through their local church or similiar organization for free, I'm going to recommend you check into the funny farm.

Two- It is a proven fact that when economic units (people, companies, etc) compete in an open and free market, the consumer always wins in terms of wuality and price... any arguement otherwise is a denial of known economic law...

I agree that employers shouldn't have to foot the bill for healthcare unless they want to. If they fell like attracting better employees by offering healthcare, more power to them. But the government is not the answer... I don't need the government to find my own insurance for my car, why do I need them for my health? Government shoudl sit back an regulate in order to do what it has done for the better part of the 20th century (before then it was caveat emptor [sp?]), which it guard the consumer from fraud, deception (like the credit card companies do), and the like. That way, honest companies compete to provide the best survice and the cheapest price.

Compete against other industrialized nations? Where have you been? We out-produce, per capita, EVERY NATION ON THE PLANET when we account for those goods by their value.

Jobs with living wages.... then stop working for bad wages... we're so hurt for workers to fill jobs we overlook illegal immagrants just to fill them... So what we need are lazy individuals to stop saying they won't do a job because its their dream to do something else or the job is too dirty...

And if we weren't competitive, then why are we the largest exporter in the world?

And the name isn't bobbie....

Finally, because it just came to me.... If I look back a few years (assuming this site existed then) will I see condemnations of the govt for the handling of Katrina disaster? If so, how many of those lay a proper amount (aka mostly all) at the feet of New Orleans mayor and Louisana Governor for their lack of action before the event?

And no matter how you lay the blame... remember, this is the vaunted govt you want to manage your access to healthcare....

Oh Yay! Playing the Katrina card. There was plenty of blame to go around, but the Fed holds most of the responsibility for the disastrous response by FEMA, an effective organization until Bush staffed it with unqualified cronies. Brownie's relevant background? Oh yeah, noted Arabian horse expert.

Because we are also one of the largest importers.... simply, we import more value in goods than we export because many of the imported goods are consumables or short-life expectancy items...

you say
"As far as Hispanics taking the jobs Americans won’t do, I thought we did that one to death long ago. Americans don’t want jobs that don’t pay a living wage. Hiring immigrants at less than a living wage/minimum wage drives down wages for all workers."

Yet how are they living? How are they THRIVING on that wage, finding money left over to send home? Simply, American workers want the money to pay for the new Mustang, house where every member of the family has their own room (minus the parents), a pet or three, a Camry for the mom, satellite TV, etc etc etc... what we call poor here is middle or upper class in many 3rd world nations... The truth is that when I see a young lady in the grocery paying with food stamps with a baby on her hip and the father is wearing a brand new Starter jacket (something I can't even afford) and they drive away in a car 10 years younger than mine (I drove a 90 buick century until about 2004, when I bought the dodge I drive now), something is wrong with what we call the "poor"... I wouldn't even DREAM of showing my face to an office for the poor if I was buying nice cars and new jackets and then claiming I couldn't put food in the mouth of my kid...

VA isn't as great as you think... I have alot of personal stories from my family (who have served in every war back to WWII w/ the US Armed Forces) and I can't say I'm impressed with the VA at all... But the US government has a history of sometimes giving its vets the shaft... just look at the "Bonus March" and how it was handled..

Medicare- no comment.. since that one can be argued round and round whether or not its good (not to mention constitutional) But my biggest statement would be why not leave these things to teh states where they can be more closely monitored and tailored to the needs of the people. Too much waste comes from a level of bueacracy that serves no one.

It is a tough choice... watching a family member die of luekemia was not pretty and the bills from that left my parents with nothing from her life insurance. Thankfully, grandfather, who made good money in real estate (after leaving the AF) ponied up for all the funeral costs.

But when you quit your job, have you simply decided to not work again, or are you seeking/did you seek new employment elsewhere?

Bob, I would like you to explain why SCHIP is unconstitutional. The Constitution is not just a piece of paper, it is meant--was meant by the founding fathers--to evolve over time to best serve the interests of United States citizens, even children without a vote.

No, Bob, I did not quit my job with no intention to work again. I am going to get my parent through the holidays, depleting my savings and praying for no health issues, and then try to find employment early next year. Will be hard with the huge hole in my resume, but it's a personal choice and the best one for my family.

Nice sparring with you. Have to go take mom to the doctor. Oh yeah, she's on Medicare. Your tax dollars at work! :P

matx @ 86:

Bob, I would like you to explain why SCHIP is unconstitutional. The Constitution is not just a piece of paper, it is meant--was meant by the founding fathers--to evolve over time to best serve the interests of United States citizens, even children without a vote.

Oooooo... the "evolve over time" theory... Ok... I disagree with you on that and if you'd like some words from the founders themselves to back it up, note so in your next post or post a drop account at hotmail and I'll hand you some resources...

But ilregardless whether they intended so or not, the constitution specifically states in Article 1, section 8: (I shall exerpt all powers related to war and the militia just to make this easier to read)

"The Congress shall have power
to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;—And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Thus are the powers of congress, now for the key limiting phrase is found in amendment X:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people."

So, if it was not delegated by the constitution, it is a possible power of the States or the people...
Establishing a welfare system does not serve the purpose of making war, coining money, making treaties, giving letters of marque, etc etc...

The SCHIP program funding is born of incredibly weak policy. It relies upon people smoking to increase the funding in the program. It also puts 400,000 to 500,000 poor Central Americans out of work leaving with no real options other than to get poorer and that is just in the cigar industry. Poor people who smoke will pay the penalty rather than large manufacturers. Use your sense and think. The hypocrisy is massive.

Back from the Dr. Mom needs some tests. Her Dr. made a phone call and gave a referral and she will have the tests next week. My for-profit HMO would have fought those tests tooth and nail.
Bob@90, in the preamble to the constitution are the words "promote the general welfare." One could argue that assuring equal access healthcare is a part of promoting the general welfare. We could argue that interpretation the same way people argue the interpretation of the second amendment - the right to bear arms, or a right to a well armed militia? The framers were smart guys and were at times vague on purpose because Ooooo..."the evolve over time theory." Constitution aside, isn't it the right thing to do? Also, back then, people paid for their health care with chickens and produce.
I agree that people must take personal responsibility for themselves and I have no pity for those who go into interest-only, no down payment ARMS to buy a house they can't afford while they finance the latest SUV. However, for every story you march out about an individual like that, another individual can be marched out who took personal responsibility and ended up falling through the cracks through no fault of their own. Kitty lost her job/insurance and ended up being diagnosed in the ER. I don't know if the two are related, but George Bush recently recommended that people without health care use the ER. You and I pay for that when we pay for insurance.
I have a friend who adopted a cat and wanted to name him Bob. It's a really cool cat. His formal name is "Bobert."

Piren @ 94:

Back from the Dr. Mom needs some tests. Her Dr. made a phone call and gave a referral and she will have the tests next week. My for-profit HMO would have fought those tests tooth and nail.
Bob@90, in the preamble to the constitution are the words "promote the general welfare." One could argue that assuring equal access healthcare is a part of promoting the general welfare. We could argue that interpretation the same way people argue the interpretation of the second amendment - the right to bear arms, or a right to a well armed militia? The framers were smart guys and were at times vague on purpose because Ooooo..."the evolve over time theory." Constitution aside, isn't it the right thing to do? Also, back then, people paid for their health care with chickens and produce.
I agree that people must take personal responsibility for themselves and I have no pity for those who go into interest-only, no down payment ARMS to buy a house they can't afford while they finance the latest SUV. However, for every story you march out about an individual like that, another individual can be marched out who took personal responsibility and ended up falling through the cracks through no fault of their own. Kitty lost her job/insurance and ended up being diagnosed in the ER. I don't know if the two are related, but George Bush recently recommended that people without health care use the ER. You and I pay for that when we pay for insurance.
I have a friend who adopted a cat and wanted to name him Bob. It's a really cool cat. His formal name is "Bobert."

I hope the tests yield good news. For everyone's information, I'm not related to the cat. Thank you.

The general welfare quote is an interesting point and I'm glad you bring it up. Some scholars believe that it is more in reference to the safety of the public and good economic policies that yield an environment with opportunities for the people. This is one we can debate though the arguement that it certainly didn't mean welfare is strong, since the concept wouldn't occur until the late 1800s, with Germany's unemployment program, and Mr. Carl Marx's more widely read ideas on the topic. A far cry from the 1790s.

As far as the living document, as I have stated elsewhere on this site that I am a strict constructionist, though the meaning of this word is intended as an umbrella for the theories of originalism and textualism. I support it with the following, though not exhaustive, main points.

Judicial is the most dangerous part... and the one which I address since the judiciary first struck down much of FDR's then-radical legislation going beyond what any other president has done... Many historians credit his second wave in 1935 and the pressure on the Supreme Court as the ice broke... the river of legislation passed every year since is awe-inspiring compared to how little they passed in the years before.

1) The brench is the most popular place to "amend" the document without the people's input. My arguement against changing the constitution here is simple. Judges interpret law, not make law or change it to suit whatever agenda they hold. It does not reveal any gaps in the constitution for there to be "holes", only that these holes may be filled with statutory law or amendments. The reason government powers are regulated strictly to the constitution is that it is well known that power acquired is power never given away. They purposely made it hard for the document to be changed so as to prevent the whim of the moment interpretation by a majority to suit its own needs.

2) While recognising the need for a stronger federal government, all of the delegates were still fearful of one too strong. Thus the phrase found in Amendment X regulating all powers not explicitly stated to the states and people. Another proof of this fear of a powerful central government is the Bill of Rights amendments proceeding the 10th, especially the 1st and 2nd and 4th.

3) Numerous court cases and famous judges, people of far more learning than I, have weighed in on the matter
SOUTH CAROLINA v. US, 199 U.S. 437, 448 (1905)
specifically, "The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now."

"It is difficult to maintain the illusion that we are interpreting a Constitution, rather than inventing one." — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Scalia, in his minority dissenting opinion in Nebraska vs. Carhart

Going back alittle further
"Judges ought to remember that their office is jus dicere, and not jus dare; to interpret law, and not to make law, or give law." --Francis Bacon, From "The Essays of Counsels, Civil and Moral"

"This member of the government, the court, the judiciary, was at first considered as the most harmless and helpless of all the government's organs, but it has proved that the power of declaring what the law is, by sapping and mining slyly and without alarm the foundations of the Constitution can do what open force would not dare to attempt." -Thomas Jefferson (in a letter to Edward Livingston, 1825)

Jefferson also said this, which I believe is relavent
"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?" — THOMAS JEFFERSON (1801)

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." — THOMAS JEFFERSON

While specific, another framer had this to say about "construing" the constitution to mean things it doesn't.
"The said Constitution be never construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." — Samuel Adams, during Massachusetts's Convention to Ratify the Constitution

Thomas Paine also had a few words on governments at any size and certainly bigger ones.
"Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins ... Society is in every state a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." — THOMAS PAINE

I believe these are all especially important comments on government and being wary of additions and methods of adding which circumvent the people as a whole. After all, once we start to interpret, where to we stop? What guiding principles do we act by? Do we do it for the public good?

Two final quotes
First
"I am a democrat because I believe that no man or group of men is good enough to be trusted with uncontrolled power over others. And the higher the pretensions of such power, the more dangerous I think it both to the rulers and to the subjects. Hence Theocracy is the worst of all governments. If we must have a tyrant a robber baron is far better than an inquisitor. The baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity at some point be sated; and since he dimly knows he is doing wrong he may possibly repent. But the inquisitor who mistakes his own cruelty and lust of power and fear for the voice of Heaven will torment us infinitely because he torments us with the approval of his own conscience and his better impulses appear to him as temptations. And since Theocracy is the worst, the nearer any government approaches to Theocracy the worse it will be. A metaphysic, held by the rulers with the force of a religion, is a bad sign. It forbids them, like the inquisitor, to admit any grain of truth or good in their opponents, it abrogates the ordinary rules of morality, and it gives a seemingly high, super-personal sanction to all the very ordinary human passions by which, like other men, the rulers will frequently be actuated. In a word, it forbids wholesome doubt. A political programme can never in reality be more than probably right. We never know all the facts about the present and we can only guess the future. To attach to a party programme--whose highest real claim is to reasonable prudence--the sort of assent which we should reserve for demonstrable theorems, is a kind of intoxication."

— C.S. Lewis, from the essay "A Reply to Professor Haldane,"
as printed in On Stories And Other Essays on Literature

And finally, perhaps most radically
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear." ~ Marcus Tullius Cicero (42B.C)

Oh please, STFU, Bob Road. Go to a libertarian website where your Ayn Rand-style outlook will be appreciated.

"Mean-spirited?" Yes, you are. Not because you advocate "freedom." Rather because, for adherence to your wacko philosophy, you want sick kids to go without health care.

"I’m not a republican," you say. No shit. Your views would be unacceptable to all but the most rabidly free-market Repubs.

You say taxes are theft. That's all any sane caring person needs to know about you.

You're an asshole, Bob. A libertarian, go-it-alone, to-hell-with-sick-kids asshole. Go to hell.

I hope a relative of yours gets really sick and you have to see them make a choice between death and accepting taxpayer-funded funded care. Then maybe you'll start giving a fuck about other people.

Again, go to hell.

Bob Road @ 97:

xoites defends Constitution @ 95:

Now we find out that people who do not have health insurance should not have children if they are going to get sick. I had no idea. It seems to me if we are to go that far we should not allow people to have children who are going to grow up to be mean spirited, evil, right wing Republicans.

This is a program i could get behind.

Why should they not have children? Parents have cared for the children largely without doctors for thousands of years? What we should not allow is the robbing of others to pay for what obviously two parents think they can do without and then find maybe they do.

Mean-spirited? How is the advocacy of freedom to choose to have kids, acknowledging you can't at your current income pay for healthcare, mean-spirited? (btw, I'm not a republican) On the other hand, how is taxing one person to give it to another, in light of such a decision, anything but theft and destruction of that person's will to achieve, since the bounty of his effort is taken to reward those who have made poor decisions and must be bailed out?

Lets start with you not using the hiways anymore since the mere pitance you pay in taxes would not paint the stripes on them. We are either a society or we are not. You want to live in a land where you have absolutely no responsibilities to your fellow citizens? Fine, but be consistant. Use only dirt roads, install a septic tank in your back yard and stay off the internet (you don't want to participate in our infrastructure either, i assume.)

Barb @ 101:

Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout @ 43:

Does the right wing know they are inadvertently making an argument for abortion rights? The only good children are the ones planned for and wanted, right?

The right wing is against birth control, too. What the wingers want is for abstinence for poor people. It makes right-wingers all itchy to think that somewhere somehow poor people are enjoying sex (easier to enjoy when you have a heart in your breast rather than a cashbox). Children the poor can't provide for are a punishment for sex. If society provides reasonable medical care that interferes with the punishment.

Don't forget that the only real power the poor have is their children. Perhaps the idea is to take that little bit of power away from them by any means necessary.

Bottom line - slam the parents all you want but should the children have to pay for the questionable decisions made by parents? Children can not advocate for themselves, nor can they get a job and pay for their own insurance. Mark Hemingway can point fingers and play the "poster child" game all he wants. This precious child was stuck in a situation not of her own making.

104 Bob Road

Let's start with who is bleeding the country dry.

Enron never, not once pais ANY taxes. Haliburton does not, has not paid taxes. Where are our tax dollars going? It is not to people grabbing handfulls of free condoms and it is certainly not to people with catastrophic illnesses. It is to the defense contractors. Yes! those lovely people who go in and out of government, in and out of the defense industry, from the Pentagon to the Carlyle Group. Those are the filthy BASTARDS who are sucking our country dry! They also happen to be the same assholes who lie to us about WMD's and send our soldiers off to quagmires.

You poor baby, it must be so damned hard for you to part with those tax dollars so a fellow American might live. MY HEART FUCKING BLEEDS for you!

xoites defends Constitution @ 105:

104 Bob Road

Let's start with who is bleeding the country dry.

Enron never, not once pais ANY taxes. Haliburton does not, has not paid taxes. Where are our tax dollars going? It is not to people grabbing handfulls of free condoms and it is certainly not to people with catastrophic illnesses. It is to the defense contractors. Yes! those lovely people who go in and out of government, in and out of the defense industry, from the Pentagon to the Carlyle Group. Those are the filthy BASTARDS who are sucking our country dry! They also happen to be the same assholes who lie to us about WMD's and send our soldiers off to quagmires.

You poor baby, it must be so damned hard for you to part with those tax dollars so a fellow American might live. MY HEART FUCKING BLEEDS for you!

So, instead of debating me on the facts of the matter at hand, you insist on shifting the point of discussion to a party not here to defend themselves and further more already convicted of crime... How about so easily laying this at the feet of, say, Nickelodeon. Have you checked to make sure they are paying their taxes? What about your neighbors? Are they doing their part? Is Big Brother doing its part? What year is it? What you say? Nineteen Eighty-Four?

You heart bleeds for nothing. Hard? No, I just recite this nice little prayer whenever the idiots close in around me:
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can
and the wisdom to know the difference.

No part of that in that says I will spew vitrol, call names and vilify my opponents, or shift blame faster than a jack rabbit.

And remind me what SCHIP solves? Is the money solving anything? No.. we are not teaching people to fish... just giving them fish.

Why not donate some of your time and "empower" them to make more money so they don't have to rely on other people's redistributed wealth.

107 Bob Road

And remind me what SCHIP solves? Is the money solving anything? No.. we are not teaching people to fish… just giving them fish.

I think a more appropriate quote might be, "Are we teaching people how to do surgery...just giving them surgery."

I know wicker baskets that hold more water than your arguments.

Ovid @ 106:

Jesus fuck, Bob Road, you are one horrible excuse for a human being.

"Let me reverse this ..." you say. Let's reverse the situation this way: Consider it's a young YOU, 5-year-old Bob Road, in dire need of medical care to SAVE YOUR LIFE. And your parents can't afford it. By your reasoning, by your demented philosophical rationale for greed and the justified neglect of children's medical needs, you shouldn't get that medical care because people other than your parents would have to pay taxes for it.

Good golly, you're an asshole.

No, my parents, would have tried to go to the local church or charity and ask for donations.... How many times have donations and charitable events saved lives? How many of such events have you participated in or donated to? You know, that little cup in the gas station? Personally, I figure if I only ever keep quarters and give all the dimes, nickels, and pennies to those causes, it'll add up to alot more in the hands of those in need than any government program could ever do with my taxes.

but since we're on a govt bueacracy binge, why stop with the US? why not take every dime you have and give it to the American Food-Aid program so you can feed all the children of the world!

Meanwhile, I think I'll just go on doing my job, delivering the food you so graciously paid for to those hungry mouths... and take what I can of my paycheck to help stimulate the economy to make more jobs so that little Bethany, who survived her parents whatever the value of their decision and continue to donate to the little cups of the needy in my community.

As for this discussion, its evident the name calling is all you have left and since reasoned arguement seems to be at an end, I'll not post on this story again.

Xoites, I think this is hopeless. It seems obvious Bob does not have the gift of empathy. He won't know until he walks a mile in the medically needys' shoes

JMHO

[...] I linked to an NRO post by Mark Hemingway that attacked the parents of Bethany Wilkerson. Among other insinuations, Hemingway wrote, While the debate around the Frost family at least [...]

Perhaps we should stop funding the fire department and police departments as well? After all...that is socialization if ever it existed!

Dr. Squid @ 9:

I can see it already: The Wilkersons' trip to Washington from Florida proves that their story isn't what it seems to be - they should stay put.

Again, in conservative-world - if you're not completely destitute, you're not deserving.

And if you are destitute then you made bad decisions and aren't deserving!!