|
Re: Bush vows to veto children's health care bill ... because it's too costly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CowboyTed
Steve you were part of the most bloated part of big goverment, defense. You took advantage of this big goverment handout for your job at the expense of of other areas of Goverment.
Steve you were not against Child healthcare, you just took there money and then say that Children should fend for themselves or extract it from there parents.
Now Parents have three possible reasons for not paying for there chidrens health care
1. They can't afford it. Through mistake or unfortunate decisions in life they can either afford food, shelter and/or healthcare for there children. It is as simple as that.
2. That parents don't want to provide them healthcare for two reasons:
They wasnt nothing to do with there kids. We should not force people to become parents, it usually ends up with pretty fucked up and abused kids. If you can find after they abandon them and force them to pay well done.
The parents spend the money on going on vacation and consider it more important. This is just incredible bad parenting and the state would have to judge are these even fit parents and shouldn't they just garnish the parents wages for their child healthcare anyway.
|
I do believe this is one of the most confused posts to ever appear on this forum.
__________________
I am a liberal, a classical liberal. Classical liberalism is liberalism, but the current collectivists have captured that designation in the United States. In Europe they are glad enough to call themselves socialists. But no one in America wants to be called socialist and admit what they are.
|