Rep. King, since you have displayed a placard identifying S-CHIP as “Socialized Clinton style Hillarycare for Illegalds and their Parents” during your address, is it safe to assume that you will not be voting to override Bush’s veto?
I love these guys. Even if you disagree with the S-CHIP expansion, it is breathtaking to sit back and watch these chowderheads. And I can not WAIT for someone to compare their votes on S-CHIP, their votes on the Prescription Drug Giveaway, and their donor records from big Pharm.
*** Update ***
The override vote failed by a tally of 273-156, falling 13 votes short. The most amusing thing to watch in the short term will be the blogger triumphalism in some quarters of the wingnut right. No one please tell them that their accomplishment is to “win” 156 out of 429 votes (37%).
Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations.
*** Update #2 ***
Be afraid. I installed photoshop today and have spent the entire day trying to make it work. My first effort:
King sure does like his own government funded health care.
Perhaps we should take that away fron him, and let him enter the free for all health care market.
$190 billion for one year of endless war but fuck you and your kids if they need health care you can’t pay for.
(there’s a compelling message for the GOP in 2008)
What was that one epic wingnut post?
“How do you expect to enjoy your government health care if the terrorists kill you all?”
Seriously, I think that’s how these people really run the logic.
The comments at Sadly No on this one are pretty funny.
I also like the alternative acronyms for S-CHIP.
And as John points out. It’s one thing to attempt to explain why you oppose SCHIP expansion on the grounds of tax money usage (or whatever). But the stupidity and depth to which Republicans are going to demonize sick children and their parents is about the dumbest moves one could make politically.
One can only hope that the Democrats do some good campaign ads on this one. “Republican Steve King voted against healthcare for needy children, but for a giveaway to big pharmaceutical companies” , etc.
From Sadly No:
That about sums up the Republican opinion on healthcare, doesn’t it?
The comments at Sadly, No! are always funny. I should link them more often- you all have much to learn in the ways of snark.
That being said, I think even DougJ would agree with me regarding the progress we have made.
Screw your Children, Halliburton Is Our Priority
The great thing is that some kid out there will now not get needed care, so that this piece of fecal matter we call president can consider himself “relevant” during his lame duck period.
According to his presser yesterday, that’s what this is all about.
Bush will sacrifice anyone for his ego and vanity. The troops, your kids, whomever.
Save Cash, House the Ill in Prisons
Squalor Can Heal Indigent Preschoolers
The link to the Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn) poll is quite telling…
Oh, yeah, I’m willing to consider this in a mature and thoughtful manner without referencing brown-skinned peoples.
BTW, is that the new talking point now? They got hit hard on “choice” and “income/asset level” in their attacks on those two white families… so now they’re going to invoke the word “illegals” and hope the image of Messicans in our hospitals getting healthcare scares the base back into line?
When in trouble, they press the racism button. To Hell with them. To Hell with them all.
Even on issues where I tend to lean more toward the conservative position, such as immigration, I usually end up opposing the Republicans because they are so outrageously disgusting in their arguments and approach. On the other hand, the Democrats are so inept and craven in their own way that there is no alternative but to register as an Independent, crawl under my desk like we did for the nuclear blast alerts when I was a kid, and just hope this country is around in the morning.
Haha! LOSERS WE WIN! You thought you could win wth your poster-child abuse but you did not win you LOSE! And do not tell me it is about the children we all know you do not care if you did you would not be giving free birth control in public schools. You just want to win you will do anything to win but today YOU LOSE WE WIN!
USA! USA! USA! USA!
Some “Compassion”, Heartless Idiot President
Yes! And MEDICARE stands for
I wonder how he feels about the MMA, which was mandated by Bush and includes Section 1011.
Pssst….dude….it’s 24 percent now.
Focus On Your Own Damn Family!
estamoz en su hospital que roban su healthcarez
There is no argument, that’s why you hear, HILLARY, SOCIALIZED MEDECINE, CLINTON, CLINTON, CLINTON!!!!, over and over. Its a substitution for debate. When an argument can be dismissed in the eyes of your followers simply by saying one simple word out loud then why even have a debate? The RNC knows “HillaryCare!!!” is not an argument, they know ‘we’ know it, they ain’t talking to us though. They’re only talking to the folks who listen to Savage or Rush or O’Reilly. I have people in my office right now saying Hillary wants the canadian system which forces people to wait six months for a hip replacement. Myths work. Well!
Then change a comma in the original legislation and bring it up for a vote again. Maybe even a little extra funding for children with disabilities. Hammer them.
And since the other guys loves them their charts to understand things, help them out with your own. You know, like Brownback’s smiling and frowning zygotes. On a chart under “Without SCHIP”, put a drawing of a Dickens like kid. Undernourished, dirty, ragged clothes with tears in his eyes. Next to that have “With SCHIP” with a picture underneath of a buff kid in clean clothes saluting the flag.
Then pop the popcorn and listen to the Malkinettes scream “Not Fair!” and how they’ve been victimized.
You know if a couple more polls confirm that those will officially be the lowest poll numbers of a sitting president, ever.
And let’s not forget Clinton’s numbers never went that low, and were like 3x as high during the censure/impeachment hearings.
These jackoffs wouldn’t know popularity if it were handed to them on a silver platter.
The Other Steve
How can the snowflake babies grow and flourish without healthcare?
Shrill Conservatives Have Insane Priorities.
Sick Children, Helped Into Poverty.
Oh, and here’s some more genius commentary from mbecker908, of Red State:
The hits keep on coming!
snowflake babies will get their own care under the republican Snowflake Children’s Health Insurance Plan.
sucks its not getting expanded, but it’s a win-win for the dems. now they have a hell of an electoral cudgel to throw around. and once they win many more seats in 08, they can just pass the expansion handily.
that’s all the goopers are gonna get out of this, putting it off for a while. and the hell they’re going to pay in election season is a shitty trade-off for them IMHO.
The Other Steve
Shhhh… The wingnuts would like you all to forget that Clinton is three times more popular than Bush.
That’s why the keep attempting the whole sad kabuki dance with “Hillary has high negatives, no one will vote for her. So go ahead, make her the nominee…” blah blah blah.
They think it will unify people in opposition, but that’s just because the 24%ers hate her.
Frankly, I think Hillary or Obama or Edwards could beat anyone in the Republican field right now. Especially when you throw in the mountain of poo the Republicans are sure to excrete between now and election day. And by poo I mean more bad news on the economy, more corruption/sex scandals, more resignations, boneheaded votes against children’s healthcare, etc.
i know it’s bad form, but… i must whore myself.
*S*crew *C*ompassion, *H*on. *I*’m *P*resident.
It’s a big tent. You think that the 28% all think GWB is the Greatest President ever but we are not all goose-stepping sheep like you. We also take people who think he is only Great not Greatest and even some people who are now thinking that it really was a shame Alan Keyes didn’t get the nod in 2000. Big Tent.
BTW, in case you didn’t know, GWB was the lone holdout on the vote to add a wildcard to the playoffs. He said it would ruin baseball and history would prove him right. Now Torre has been fired because his wildcard team did not win the ALCS. The only reason you aren’t admitting GWS is not a genius is because you’re mentally deranged. If things had gone his way, Torre would still have a job and unemployment would be lower. Why do you hate Joe Torre?
Some Cock-sucking? Have to Impeach the President
Someone should tell these guys that continuously throwing around “socialism” as a pejorative makes them increasingly come across as the party of Montgomery Burns.
Damn those Bolsheviks. 23 Skidoo!
Given that King made himself notorious two years ago by declaring that Joe McCarthy was “an American hero”, I tend to go with Stupid Commie-Hating Imbecile Prevaricates.
No offense, 28 Percent, but your schtick is too close to the real thing to be very effective as satire. (The first time I read you, even I thought you were being serious.) Of course, one of the reasons to resent these characters is that they make satire near-impossible.
Pb if that is your real name you do not credit the RedState commentators enough. They were right that if Pelosi had taken a 75% reduction in the bill that originally passed with a veto proof majority that the remaining 25% might have passed and delivered her a victory. Democrats just do not like to win I guess, but it is like the commentor says if they attained the goal of expanding S-CHIP by agreeing to a token expansion then what would they have put in the direct mail? It is a stupid political ploy and you lost haha. You might listen to that commentator he is smart he has a quote from Winston Churchill in his sig it says:
“No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong.” – Winston Churchill
So you know he is sincere in his criticism.
That’s one I’d really like to see. Is this from an undiscovered Monty Python skit?
That was the problem DougJ ran into. Every time you think he’s being so over the top it’s ludicrous, a Steve King comes along and outdoes the spoofers by a mile.
I mean, c’mon, just last week it was peeping in people’s windows and speculating about their countertops, yesterday it was willingness to stab someone in a thigh, and today its ridiculous anagrams.
The Onion needs to put up an issue with actual Republican quotes and see if anyone notices the difference.
Oh, no, Cricket, not yet:
I’m under the impression that the real recordholder for unpopularity is one Harry S. Truman. He hit 22% in the spring of 1952. Bush’s popularity, if 24% holds, will however enable him to say to posterity that he is just as unpopular now as Richard Nixon was when he stepped onto the helicopter and flew away to San Clemente. So there’s that.
Since everyone who’s a Democrat or Independent has long since “left” the side of the President, how do his poll numbers keep dropping?
At this point I can only conclude that the insanity-brigade (aka RedState, Powerline, et. al.) disapprove of Bush because he’s not crazy enough (i.e. the darkies are breeding faster than we can kill them).
Here’s some info from the mystery pollster
So one more percent to go!
Now, how about a similiar photoshop effort, changing the sign to declaim:
SCHIP stands for:
Nice job on the Photoshop, John.
Looking phorward to much more photo-phun phrum you in the phuture.
I’m off tomorrow – have a good weekend, everybody.
Or in the spirit of Orwell:
How do we know they haven’t already? Maybe they have, and we just didn’t notice.
I am ok with the S-CHIP program and the intent of it, but I am glad this did not pass only for the reason that it is not properly funded. This is a chickenshit move by the Democrats to upgrade the S-CHIP program and pass the burden for it onto the backs of a minority of our country. Since most tobacco users are lower income people to begin with, it seems almost twisted to fund a program for the poor by taxing those lower income smokers, some of who would be eligible for the program.
Funding a program for the poor by increasing taxes on some of the poor is nuts. Sure, there are a few fatcats who chomp on cigars, but blue collar workers make up most of the tobacco consumption in our country.
Keith Olbermann was exclaiming “How can they be against this?! 66% of the people of this country are willing to pay higher taxes for it and yet it is voted down!”… Well, I like Keith, but I will bet that the 66% who say they are for this don’t smoke, so the higher taxes will not affect them anyway. It is easy to be for something when you don’t have to pay for it.
With this funding for S-CHIP, and Measure 50 here in Oregon, which jacks cigarette taxes 81 cents a pack for kids health and gives state government a $65 million blank check every year, my smoking costs would go up over $500.00 in one year. So would anyone in Oregon who smokes a pack a day.
If you think that is fair then you better expect the same when they come after your cash because they have milked all they can out of us smokers.
Heck, maybe now that the state and feds want to fund childrens healthcare (and whatever else they can) off of the back of smokers, maybe they will put up posters on busses, the subway, maybe some billboards and TV ads, all proclaiming:
Smoke your favorite brand of cigarettes and help poor children! Do your part to keep our kids healthy!!!
Maybe they can pass out free cigarette samples from state and county/city offices. Set aside a month for childrens health programs and hold smoke-a-thons across the country.
I understand that smokers are not popular, but it is a choice that I have made. I have no problem with helping the poor with health insurance. I only want everyone else to pay their fair share too. This program is to benefit the poor across our nation, and our nation should pay for it.
Fair is fair, and it is a burden that should be shouldered equally by all. Otherwise it is a feel good program where the majority can go around patting themselves on the back for having done something that they believe is honorable (and it would be but for the funding), when in reality they have let those who are most able to financially support the program get away without having to pay a cent for it.
I can see why the funding is something that warms the bones of a politician; the majority want it, a minority funds it. No danger for them, they get to take the easy way out once again.
Not speaking to the real point, of course, but I’ll put Nebraska’s state cigarette taxes up against Oregon’s. A pack of cigarettes (non-discount brand) costs $5.10 here in the middle of the country. What is it in Oregon?
Actually, it may be more than that by now. I quit smoking on January 1, 2007.
Actually, it may be more than that by now. I quit smoking January 1, 2007. Haven’t bought a pack or smoked a cigarette since. Saved a lot of money though.
They are $4.80 to $5.00 a pack here for name brand. Cigarette taxes, or any tax on a small segment of the population, are the preferred funding method for politicians. The majority are pleased and the minority are pissed. Their job is safe, and all they had to do was to pit one segment of the population against the other, then reap the rewards of an easy re-election.
Very little of the money that the government got out of the lawsuits against the tobacco industry awhile back actually went for prevention/education. Most of it was just shoveled into the maw of the government machine to feed its incessant hunger for cash.
Today I heard that a town in California is voting next week to ban all outside smoking in the town. If tobacco taxes are supposed to fund childrens health care, does this mean that they hate the children? ;)
I guess that we smokers are just an easy target. Well, if they keep it up, one day this target will be gone.
Who do you think they will go after next? Maybe you?
Actually, that seems only fair, and it’s called “getting what you pay for”–twisted would be if they specifically made those self-same lower income smokers ineligible (you know, like some private insurers do for “pre-existing conditions”).
Anyhow, it’s about as twisted as using a state lottery (“a tax on people who are bad at math”) to fund schools (as my state does). Or, you know, establishing tolls (a tax on people who go to work every day) to pay for roads.
Ah, the truth comes out. At least you aren’t trading tips on tax evasion for unpatriotic smokers (yet).
Pb, what you say makes some sense but you have to admit that if your argument was right then all of the poor would pay for the program. Not just the smokers.
Just so you know, I do not play the lottery (or gamble at all), and I am against state sponsored lotteries of any sort. Tolls on roads go to the roads. Thus the taxes are being used for the service that is taxed.
The tax on smokers does not benefit the smokers. Unless you want to count the poor juveniles who smoke and will get free health care. ;)
And yes, I am a smoker. If you are going to have a political discussion, it is best to state your position and why you are taking it. In this case, I would be against this funding method even if I was not a smoker. Unfair taxation is just that.
Excellent photoshopping work John.
By your standards, yes, taxation is often ‘unfair’. A lot of people who pay property taxes don’t have kids. Now I’m actually against the concept of property taxes for another reason–not because it goes to fund schools–but it is one of the oldest forms of taxation, and therefore isn’t going anywhere, anytime soon. Sales taxes are regressive, as is the payroll tax. I agree that sin taxes are overused. And I do find it somewhat ridiculous when we both a) tax a product and b) subsidize the relevant industry–I say, kill both the subsidy and the tax, in equal amounts.
As for the S-CHIP program: it’d be fine with me if the money for it came from somewhere else, like income tax revenues. Of course the Democrats could have tried (yet again) to pay for it by rolling back Bush’s tax cuts in the upper income brackets, but that would have been even more of a non-starter. Or, they could have not provided direct funding for it at all–an approach that seems to work for Iraq–but I imagine they’d get attacked for that nonetheless. However, with a cigarette tax, even if they did end up generating less revenue for themselves due to the tax increase (and thus, less smokers), that also would likely improve the general health of the population–including the poor juveniles who will now live in a smoke-free household.
P.S. As to why smoking actually causes lung cancer, etc., I personally think it has a lot to do with this under-reported fact; check it out.
While I understand that you feel smoking shouldn’t be taxed to pay for non-anti-smoking issues, that’s just not how taxation works in this country. Why in particular is it unfair?
Why is it less fair that regressive tolls or sales taxes? Why should property owners pay for schools (as they do in my state)? Why doesn’t 100% of the gas tax go towards road maintenance? Some argue that those that make more money shouldn’t pay more as a percent of income, do you agree or not? Why do you have to pay taxes on money inherited from your parents or grandparents?
The reality is that many states are hamstrung in their ability to raise funds through income or property taxes (see states without an income tax, or states like CA and WA with property tax caps). And we all approve ervices x, y & z, and need to pay for them. So until people start saying “OK, cancel services x and y”, you gotta get the money from somewhere. I see nothing inherently unfair about taxing one activity over another (smoking v. owning property v. driving) to pay for the various services.
Until we have a single source of taxes (say, income only, with all “cap gains” treated as income too), and those taxes are at a rate high enough to pay for all the services our representatives in government have approved for us, the money will have to come from the various use taxes allowed in each state.
If I had my druthers, I’d totally get behind the idea of a simpler (but progressive) income-only tax base. I’d be in favor of getting rid of sales tax, car tab fees & sin taxes (maybe even gas tax too) and just upping the income tax (or implementing one, as would be needed in 7 states) to cover the shortfall. I’d probably argue for making it more progressive, with a higher top tax rate, and eliminate special treatment for things like capital gains and inheritance (wouldn’t be taxed higher/lower than regular income). Just like I’m behind eliminating the Social Security income cap as a way to cover that shortfall.
But you can’t simply remove the various use taxes without replacing the revenue or canceling services (which no one apparently wants to do outside of Ron Paul).
BTW – just to be clear, I’d make sure corporations (and corporate income) were taxed enough to cover their share too. One of the biggest shams of the last 20-30 years is how corporate America is paying a decreasing percent of taxes (as an overall percent of tax revenue), meaning that citizens are shouldering more and more of the burden while corporate profits are at record highs.
You could probably even eliminate property taxes and pay for it by getting rid of the mortgage deduction — although let’s see how well that goes :-)
On the one hand, it is hard to imagine a more pathetic and idiotic battle cry than “Waaaah! Oppressed Smokers!” even if one uses high-octane words like “minority” and invokes the image of the poor huddled masses yearning for a smoke break.
On the other hand, knowing that there are smokers who really are this brain dead makes me cringe and does more to encourage me to quit than any number of stats on mortality rates.
So…StFu or keep up the good work. I can’t decide which.
For those of you still feeling oppressed, if you have a yard, dig up a few feet. If you don’t, get some plant pots and some dirt. Plant some ‘baccy seeds. Grow your own, roll your own, smoke your own. STICK IT TO THE MAN!
Give your poor huddle… cough… masses… hack… yearning to breathe…. wheeze… free of second hand smoke…
I think that’s what’s on the Statue of Liberty, right?
And like any typical liberal demacrat they want required ritlin injection and birth control pill without parentuial decent