WP, Eugene Robinson: Bush's Veto "pack of flat-out LIES"

Bush's Veto Lies
By Eugene Robinson
Friday, October 5, 2007; Page A21

To say that George W. Bush spends money like a drunken sailor is to insult every gin-soaked patron of every dockside dive in every dubious port of call. If Bush gets his way, the cost of his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will soon reach a mind-blowing $600 billion. Despite turning a budget surplus into a huge deficit, the man still hasn't met a tax cut he doesn't like. And when the Republicans were in charge of Congress, Bush might as well have signed their pork-stuffed spending bills with a one-word rubber stamp: "Whatever."

So for Bush to get religion on fiscal responsibility at this late date is, well, a joke. And for him to make his stand on a measure that would have provided health insurance to needy children is a punch line that hasn't left many Republicans laughing....

***

Bush's stated reasons for vetoing the SCHIP bill left even reliable congressional allies -- such as Republican Sens. Orrin Hatch of Utah and Charles Grassley of Iowa, both of whom supported the legislation -- sputtering in incomprehension. As for me, I don't know what to call the president's rationale but a pack of flat-out lies.

The president said Congress was trying to "federalize health care," even though the program in question is run by the states. The president said that "I don't want the federal government making decisions for doctors and customers," even though the vetoed bill authorizes no such decisions -- the program enrolls children in private, I repeat, private, health insurance plans.

And here's my favorite: "This program expands coverage, federal coverage, up to families earning $83,000 a year. That doesn't sound poor to me." But the bill he vetoed prohibits states from using the program to aid families who make more than three times the federal poverty limit, or about $60,000 a year for a family of four. Most of the aid would go to families earning substantially less....

***

Either Bush didn't understand the bill he vetoed or he's just being petulant -- with the health of 4 million children at stake....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/04/AR2007100401921.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Am I the only one to say that this is all a bluff?
Bitch vetoed this bill so the pukes can seperate themselves from him
and be heroes when they vote to over-ride the vetoe.

Afterwards we'll all be saying how this or that puke isnt such a bad guy afterall.

Give me a break. There is nothing the pukes do thats not politically motivated.
Nothing, not even this. They know what they are doing.
The question is, are we (yes you centrist Dems and so-called "independents") gonna fall for it.
These pukes will never be heroes.

That the votes are there to give poor children health care. But I seriously doubt anyone will be moved to support a repuke just because they did something right for a change.

Bush is just using up the remaining 29 to 30 percent of approval he has left. It is how neocons govern. They don't see government as implementation of the will of the people, and improving their approval ratings. They see it as forcing onto the people policies the people don't want or like, and lowering their approval ratings. They see government like one big, horribly, nasty father who wont let you do anything because it is for your own good.

Their logic is that if they force fascist and destructive policies on the people now. Then later, they and the uber rich elites will reap the benefits.
After all it is for the people's own good. See if poor children see their parents working like slaves and suffering to get them health care. Then when poor children grow up, if they don't die from some illness along the way, they will have no expectations of assistance from a fascist government nor will they have a sense of entitlement. They will expect nothing from government and they will get it.

then we'll see if your theory holds up....

.... will have no effect whatsoever on the implementation of the law.

Just like signing statements have NEVER had any force of law.

Considering Kucinich stood with Bush (albeit for different stated reasons) on SCHIP, I am really curious if he will change his vote when the override vote comes up.

If he doesn't, any wisp of presidential hope he had left will be all gone, and perhaps his congressional seat too. And that will be deserved.

I find this especially rich. As Bushco rolls up the wagons into a circle, the fact that these blathering idiots don't get it that they are not one of the "cool kids" anymore just cracks me up!

Now. If they'll just pull up their pants and override a batch of vetoes we might just get somewhere.

Was this the work of some neocon blogger? Or was it pulled directly out of Shrub's ass?

They're certainly getting enough mileage out of that number.

"Bush's spurious $83,000 figure comes from a request by New York state to use the program for some families earning four times the poverty limit. That request was denied by the Bush administration last month -- and that upper limit is not in the bill Bush vetoed. End of story. If New York or any other state were to ask again to be able to raise the income limits, the administration could simply say no."