House can't override Bush kid-health insurance veto

Interesting that Mr. Neikirk did not quote Democrat Pete Stark of CA in the debate today, which caused even fellow Democrats to cringe and probably contributed to the defeat of the veto override. Here's what Stark said, according to AP: "Where are you going to get that money? Are you going to tell us lies like you're telling us today? Is that how you're going to fund the war? You don't have money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old, enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement," Stark said. Enough to make all liberals proud!

It never fails to amaze me how eager the Wingnuts are to commit political suicide and fall on their swords for Republican President 24%.

"The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail...and so far it's working for us. Democrats are taking the blame for not getting anything done."

(R) Trent Lott
Roll Call
April 18, 2007

Thank Good Where are not Communist This vote confirms it.

John,

While we're citing approval ratings, what's Congress' approval rating? Ah, yes, a historic low?

The GOP realizes what the Democrats are trying to do with SCHIP--slowly introduce universal healthcare to the USA.

It's discouraging that the democrats can't even muster-up the spine to arm twist enough votes to override this idiot president's veto of a necessary bill.

This vote was great news for hard [working] tax paying Americans!
Why should we subsidize a health care program for families making $80,000 a year?
Keep the program and expand it some for [poor] families....the dems used this as a segue for Hillary's socialized health care...
And,52% of the American agreed with Bush on this one!

Paulo

While we're citing approval ratings, what's Congress' approval rating? Ah, yes, a historic low?

The GOP realizes what the Democrats are trying to do with SCHIP--slowly introduce universal healthcare to the USA.

Posted by: Mike N. | October 18, 2007 2:08 PM

Mickey,
A majority of Americans realize that Congress isn't getting anything done because of Republican obstruction, if you don't believe me look at the poll numbers for the Republicants who are up for re-election in 08 and look at all the Republicants who are retiring.

The Republikins are going to be an endangered species after 08.

"Thank Good Where are not Communist This vote confirms it."

Yes, it does. Another "victory" for the Republicans, like the one quoted above.

When Bush can get up there and say he won't support adding more children to health insurance and at the same time spend $200 billion more for war AND continue to give away multi million dollar subsidies to Oil execs, this failure MUST SQUARELY BE PLANTED ON BUSH and HIS GOP ROBOTS!

I love how the Wingnuts are always screaming socialism when their very own Torturer in Chief (with help from the little GOP robots) is leading a Fascism revolution right here in America.

Paulo:

The $80,000 figure was for New York, and Bush decided against it.

That is the one thing that Bush forgets to say - that if a state wants to exceed the preset 3X level of poverty, they have to get the President to approve the request.

And the program is administered by PRIVATE insurance companies - which is why they are all for it.

What a great victory for Republicans! The party of incomptent war mongers, socially intolerant latant homosexuals, and limited access to children's healthcare. What a platform to build on for '08!

"Thank Good Where are not Communist This vote confirms it."

I think this comment proves that not only should we spend more money on helping children when they're sick, we should get them educated so they can type intelligent comments into blogs! Oh and I didn't know the communists were known for helping sick children??

Nancy and Harry really are Totally Useless, folks.

This is just another great exmaple.

It's time for some more commercials:

Faces of children, one after another asking: "President Bush, why do you want my parents have to have to choose between our home and my life? Don't you care about us?"

or "Don't you Republicans want to at least try to get our votes in the future?"

What a bunch of creepy, greedy, fake Christian, criminals.

Excuse me now while I shower.

"I'd like my country back, please. Now!"

Gonzongo, to the contrary, Rep. Stark's comments were GREAT!!! He's been getting praise all day from the Great Orange Satan and his minions.

We real Dems have been dying to hear someone tell your gang of incompetent thugs to shove it. Continue to obstruct and I can guarantee more of this.

Incidentally, kudus to Chris Dodd today as well.

``Are there no prisons?'' asked Scrooge.

``Plenty of prisons,'' said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.

``And the Union workhouses?'' demanded Scrooge. ``Are they still in operation?''

``They are. Still,'' returned the gentleman, `` I wish I could say they were not.''

``The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?'' said Scrooge.

``Both very busy, sir.''

``Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,'' said Scrooge. ``I'm very glad to hear it.''

``Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude,'' returned the gentleman, ``a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?''

``Nothing!'' Scrooge replied.

``You wish to be anonymous?''

``I wish to be left alone,'' said Scrooge. ``Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.''

``Many can't go there; and many would rather die.''

``If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, ``they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides -- excuse me -- I don't know that.''

``But you might know it,'' observed the gentleman.

``It's not my business,'' Scrooge returned. ``It's enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people's. Mine occupies me constantly."

Some things never change.

"YEA FINALLY SOMEONE HAS THE CHENEY BALLS TO SAY IT"

10 BILLION A MONTH IN IRAQ, NOW 30 DAYS HAVE PASSED SCHIP COULD HAVE BEEN PAID FOR.

BUT NO, THAT 10 BILLION IS SO THAT LITTLE JOHNNIE GETS ON A GEORGE BUSH BUS TO BAGHDAD AND A BLACK GARBAGE BAG TO COME HOME IN.

FACE IT AMERICA, THAT IS WHAT IS HAPPENING ON OUR WATCH. SO WHEN YOU LOOK INTO A DEAD SOLDIERS KIDS EYES, YOU MAKE SURE YOU TAKE OUT SO MO MONEY FOR GEORGE BUSH, BECAUSE HE HAS A SHRINK THAT WILL TAKE 50.00 TO TALK TO HIM. BUT YOU WILL HAVE TO PAY 500.00 TO HAVE THE SAME I CAN'T BELIEVE I ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN BILL.

MY KID WILL HAVE TO GO IN THE DRAFT AS AN OFFICER BECAUSE HE TOO WILL NEED A DUMBASS GOP DRIVER W/ONE STRIPE TO GET HIM AROUND BAGDAD WITH NO BODY ARMOR OR PROPER VEHICLE AND HIS EAVESDROPPING WIRETAPPING AT&T GIPHONEHOME.COM CARD IN HIS POCKET.

HI HONEY, TELL THE KIDS, I'M NOT COMING HOME!S

The nutty loons keep comparing health insurance to money spent in Iraq.

The problem is... Bush's #1 job is to protect us and I don't see Congress stopping the money for this effort.
But,Bush's job is not to give into socialist dems and expand childrens health care by 400% to include families making $80,000...

Get over it....You L-O-S-T!
Again!
Wheeeeew....you did get the minimum wage increase though....be happy!

Paulo

The problem is... Bush's #1 job is to protect us

Paulo

Posted by: Paulo | October 18, 2007 3:28 PM

Hey Einstein,

Who is Bush protecting us from in Iraq?

You're the one who is losing, you clown.
Say goodbye to your party in 08.

"....Faces of children, one after another asking: "President Bush, why do you want my parents have to have to choose between our home and my life? Don't you care about us?"..."

Posted by: Reaping what you Sew | October 18, 2007 3:07 PM

So filtering through your emotional gobbledy goop-lets take the $80K/year family as an example..
are you really saying that you want me to pay for that childs health care?

If this is so..you have already made the choice of House over child well before this bill died in Congress.. if the only hope for the child is to have the government- WHO EARNS NO MONEY- pay for the health care.More liberal "common" sense.

Here are some really crazy ideas to think of for parents out there earning this kid of money..
Sell one of the cars, or some of the TVs. Dip into your homes equity, or live in a smaller house, take a vacation every OTHER year. Then like magic- you might just be able to pay for the extravagant luxury like health care for your child...

Quit using my money to support your lifestyle..

Posted by: heartburn | October 18, 2007 3:48 PM

In the Wingnut mind (yours), the average American is "well off" if they have an apple to eat for dinner and a cardboard box to sleep in at night.

I call it Fascism at its finest:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jenniferesperanza/531695376/

Paulo,

The Democrats "lost" today?

Just keep thinking that way. Please.

Let's see 70% of registered voters are against the war. 80% of Americans think that SChip IS the right way to go. 80% of Americans are against any form of torture.

Bush's ratings are lower than any other President except Nixon, who left office, not necessarily of his own accord.

Did you ever hear of the term "winning the battle, but losing the war"?

What the Republicans are doing is putting the Democrats in a position to win the Presidency AND get veto proof majorities in both houses.

Now if we can only get the Democrats to quit giving into the Republicans and make STRONGER stands on these issues to demonstrate how out of touch the Republicans are from Americans.

Oh. By the way, why were so many REPUBLICAN state legislators and governors in favor of this legislation.

This WAS a bi-partisan supported issue until the right winged talk show hosts, etc. got involved.

Hillary care? You ain't seen nothing yet.

Paulo,
Gen. Betrayus testified that he didn't know if being in Iraq is making us safer. He is honorable isn't he?

"So filtering through your emotional gobbledy goop-lets take the $80K/year family as an example.."

How about using what the bill ACTUALLY SAYS, which is 3x times the povery limit, $63,000. The $83,000 was a special request from New York that was denied and is not in the bill.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/25/83000-schip/

Continuing to trot out that number after having been corrected would make you a liar (like the President). For now I'll assume you're just a misinformed partisan.

* * * * *

Posted by: dogjudge | October 18, 2007 4:17 PM

Do you genuinely think that all those Americans polled would give the same answers if they knew the truth about SCHIP?

I wonder how some of those polled would feel about the government taking their tax dollars to fund health care for people who can afford to pay for their own. No one, not even the pollsters, informs those polled of that fact. Do you think they would believe the program is still a good idea under such circumstances? I don't think they would.

Nor do I believe those people were informed that States often raid SCHIP to fund health care for adults. Poor children are one thing. No one is generally opposed to helping poor kids. But some people have a great deal of trouble with programs sold to the public on one basis, and used for another. It is known as fraud.

And do you know why the whole truth never comes out? It never comes out because there are those in Washington who believe the American public doesn't need to know how the government operates. The public doesn't need to know, according to their twisted little ways of thinking, because those politicians know better than the great unwashed American public how and why things should be done. They are the nannies in the nanny state.

Bush was right in insisting that a program enacted to provide health care to poor children should provide health care only to poor children. We don’t pass out welfare checks for middle and upper middle class workers, and neither should we pay for the health care those people can and should provide for their own children.

The next thing you know, the government will insist on providing cars, housing, food and all the other necessities of life. And there will be those who shamelessly clamor for the government to provide such things because they are addicted to the idea that the government should help them with everything.

I hope you know this nation is finished as an experiment in freedom when that comes about. It has already lost its compass when these ideas can be taken seriously.

Just this morning another Bush-hating Swamp journalist wondered if the president wasn't "relevant" any more.

Don't Swamp reporters get tired of being proven wrong?

In the Wingnut mind (yours), the average American is "well off" if they have an apple to eat for dinner and a cardboard box to sleep in at night.

I call it Fascism at its finest:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jenniferesperanza/531695376/

Posted by: Reap what you Sew | October 18, 2007 4:06 PM

Dear Reap,

You are either terribly ignorant or just plain stupid, and heartburn was absolutely right.

SCHIP was originally designed to help provide funding for health care for POOR children. The vetoed SCHIP program, as proposed, would have funded health care for the children of people making $80k per year.

People making $80k are not poor. They can well afford to provide their children with health care and all other necessities of life. They can certainly afford it more than some of the other people whose tax dollars would go to pay for it.

So, what you are telling us is that a failure to fund the well-to-do is fascism? If that is what you are telling us, then we know you don’t have a clue as to what fascism really is.

In fact, to the contrary, the fascists of Nazi Germany would have loved the proposed, but vetoed, SCHIP plan. It would have fit in nicely with their 25 point National Socialist program from the 1920s. The Nazis loved collectivist, socialist programs like SCHIP.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program

It reads like Nancy Pelosi’s to-do list.

Paulo, Enjoy this "win" while you can. With 80% of the population behind them, the only way the Democrats can lose this fight is to stop sending SCHIP bills to the president. A few more wins like this one and there won't be enough Repugs left in Congress to field a team for the annual softball game.

Continuing to trot out that number after having been corrected would make you a liar (like the President). For now I'll assume you're just a misinformed partisan.

Posted by: Distrust and Verify | October 18, 2007 4:58 PM

Ok - good point, empty and meaningless for this argument but good point...

How is this- SOME Dem lawmakers proposed an income level of $83K to be included in the progam.

Back to the real issue here- 63K or 83K are not an income level that typically would not require any of my financial support.

At what point do I have to support peoples unwillingness to prioritize health care costs above vacations, house size, consumer electronics, mutiple cars, dining out, cable TV, Cell phones ..etc.?

For starters- to get real with this thing quit calling anyone over 18 a child.. then get that income level to a level where more people that really need the help can get it..
this is a total posturing move by the DEMS.

John W

If you TRULY believe that this had ANYTHING to do with providing healthcare to families earning $80,000.00/year then I'd accept your argument.

This was all about another right wing, radio talk show, fight against any type of healthcare expansion. God forbid people can afford to get sick.

Democrats are socialists? Just about as much as Republicans are fascists.

Please. The healthcare system in the US is on the verge of collapse.

I own a recruiting firm. Fewer and fewer employers are giving their employees health benefits. The ones that do are charging more and more. In the meantime, the insurers and the pharma companies are taking the gifts from the Republicans to the bank.

THAT'S what Americans see and that's what will cause the Republicans to lose.

You don't have to agree with me. Actually, I hope you don't.

It will be a long time before the Republicans get a majority on a national level.

They've dug their own graves. And of course they'll pay for them themselves.

Posted by: John W. | October 18, 2007 6:01 PM

John W,

I remember when you called yourself a "real" Replican (whatever that is).

Let me get this straight:

200 Billion for Iraq FOR ONE YEAR = OK

S-chip = No - because in the Fascist mind this equals socialism?

Here's a quickly thrown together list of vulnerable Repugs who are coming up for re-election in 08 and voted against healthcare for our children today.

Range from very vulnerable to somewhat. This will provide good ammunition:

Michelle Bachman MN-6
Brian Bilbray CA-50
Gus Bilirakis FL-9
Steve Chabot OH-1
Barbara Cubin WY-AL
John Doolittle CA-4
Thelma Drake VA-2
Scott Garrett NJ-5
Sam Graves MO-6
Robin Hayes NC-8
Joe Knollenberg MI-9
Randy Kuhl NY-29
Thaddeus McCotter MI-11
Marilyn Musgrave CO-4
Steve Pearce NM-2 (he is retiring, but can be used against him should he receive the GOP nod for the NM Senate race)
Tom Reynolds NY-26
Mike Rogers AL-3
Peter Roskam IL-6
Bill Sali ID-1
Jim Saxton NJ-3
Jean Schmidt OH-2
Pete Sessions TX-32
Mark Souder IN-3
Lee Terry NE-2
Tim Walberg MI-7

Also, hopefully Jim Marshall will lose his seat.

The Repubs are always willing to sacrifice the future for a short term victory (Iraq), thankfully there won't be many of the knuckledraggers left after 08.

We, America, need single payer, universal, cradle to grave, national health insurance.

Pure and simple.

OK, kids, blow your noses, pull out the respirators, put on your uniforms and hop on a transport to Iraq to fight for the greatest country on earth!

* * * * *

Posted by: dogjudge | October 18, 2007 6:19 PM

1. I am against it even if it is only for families that earn $63K a year. Right now, $63K is more than I make (while on inactive status). $63K is actually a lot of money in most places in this country. And I am supposed to subsidize those who are both richer and financially able to purchase their own care? By what perverted twist of logic does that make any sense?

2. Yes, many Democrats are socialists. Many others are well on their way to being socialists. Hillary Clinton's and John Edwards' Universal Health Care plans, for example, both fall within the socialist paradigm. That is, they both insist on: (1) collectivization (everyone has to be in the plan), and (2) the plans be funded from a central source - i.e. the federal government – for which everyone collectively pays. If you can't see the socialism in this, then you don't know what socialism is. [And, yes, that means that Mitt Romney signed off on a socialist plan when he was Governor of the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts. But don’t expect me to vote for him either.]

3. Don't ask me to weigh in on whether Republicans are Fascists. Some of them just might be. Fascism is non-Marxist socialism (collectivization + central funding and/or common assets) cast in an ultra-nationalist mold. The current Republican neo-cons in charge certainly have the socialism part down pat - with their support of all New Deal programs, including the welfare state; as well as by their support for central funding of education and other, newer social programs. They also appeal to the ultra-nationalist sentiment. Their rallying point has been the "war on terrorism" - designed to invoke nationalist feelings to help coalesce popular support. I leave you to judge whether they fit the paradigm, but I suspect you might already know the answer.

4. If insurance companies are the trouble (and they ARE), then lets do something with the insurance companies - or to them - so that they stop sucking the life out of the health care system. There are several things we can do to change this:

a. Tax the profits Insurance Companies make on health care at a higher rate unless they can demonstrate that they spend more of the health care dollar on actual medical costs than they do now. That way their own self interest will induce them to bring spending back into line with what is reasonable, and allow for lower overall costs.

- or,

b. Encourage, through tax breaks, medical cooperatives which both provide coverage and health care services under the same roof. These organizations already exist, and they provide good quality, affordable health care. Kaiser-Permanente in California is one such organization. If Kaiser-Permanente can provide affordable health care in an expensive place to live like California, I am sure others can do the same elsewhere.

* * * * *

Posted by: John E | October 18, 2007 6:20 PM

You failed. You didn’t get it straight. As a matter of fact, you are clueless.

The merits of the Iraq War and SCHIP each have to stand or fall on their own merits. The fact that one is wrong doesn’t make the other right; nor do two wrongs make a right.

My positions, relative to each (which you should already know) are:

1. 200 Billion for Iraq FOR ONE YEAR = NOT OK. It hasn’t been OK this year, or last year, or the year before, or at any time since its inception. We should never have gone into Iraq, period. That has always been my position, and you have deceitfully misrepresented my stance on this issue by stating the contrary.

I opposed going into Iraq for the same reason Representative Ron Paul opposes it – and maybe for even a few more reasons than he did. And Ron Paul is a Real Republican – in case you are really looking for an example of one (although I doubt it).

2. S-chip = No – because, to any fair minded individual, the proposed amendments to the program represent an unwarranted departure from the purpose of the SCHIP program – which was to help poor families pay for their children’s health care costs. The amendments as proposed, and vetoed, would have resulted in subsidizing people who are well-off enough to pay for it themselves. It would also result in covering adults – owing to the machinations of several States. That wasn’t the intended purpose of SCHIP either. To that extent, it would represent more socialism on the part of the federal government. This is stuff only ignorant sheep can love.

3. You haven’t got a clue what fascism is if you don’t know that fascists would love the SHCIP program. Fascists are ultra-nationalist socialists. I am not a fascist because I am neither a socialist nor interested in ultra-nationalist movements. The same is true of others who opposed the proposed SCHIP expansion on the same grounds.

John W,

Quit your quackery about Dems being socialist, (which is a poor excuse for getting your arse kicked in the upcoming election by the way) and maybe we can talk, until the Repigs quit acting like fascists I will continue calling them on it.

John W,

Are you really Tony Snow?
You seem to think calling everything that the Dems do "socialism" (which is code for "the Repugs are out of ideas") is going to win you every argument and then you try to spin your way out of being called a supporter of a fascist regime THAT YOU VOTED FOR IN 2000?!?!

O J is looking for a lawyer Johnny W, why don't you give him a call?

14 Points Of Fascism:

In his original article, "Fascism Anyone?", Laurence Britt compared the regimes of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto, and Pinochet and identified 14 characteristics common to those fascist regimes.

This page is a collection of news articles dating from the start of the Bush presidency divided into topics relating to each of the 14 points of fascism. Further analysis of American Fascism done by the POAC can be read here.

1.) Powerful and Continuing Nationalism: Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

September 11 Freedom Walk

New Majority Leader: Iraq War “May Be The Greatest Gift That We Give” Our Grandchildren

Headstones of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan are inscribed with the Pentagons war-marketing slogans

White House and the RNC are going to make a habit of using uniformed military personnel as props at Republican political rallies, despite the fact that it is a plain violation of military regulations banning politicization of the armed forces.

"You must glorify war in order to get the public to accept the fact that your going to send their sons and daughters to die." The inside story of the cozy relationship between big box office American war movies and the Pentagon

2.) Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights: Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
One of the worst things you'll ever read about your government
We are now a torturing police state: Bush signing into law that will get rid of habeas corpus, allow hearsay evidence, and allow the President to determine what is allowable torture.
Bush Offers Himself Amnesty for Human Rights Crimes
Bush threatens to veto $442b defense bill if Congress investigates detainee abuses.
Guantanamo Judge: “I don’t care about international law. I don’t want to hear the words ‘international law’ again. We are not concerned with international law.”
Rumsfeld to approve new guidelines that will formalize the administration's policy of imprisoning without the protections of the Geneva Conventions and enable the Pentagon to legally hold "ghost detainees,"
US 'preparing to detain terror suspects for life without trial'
U.S. oks evidence gained through torture
July 1, 2003: U.S. Suspends Military Aid to Nearly 50 Countries: because they have supported the International Criminal Court and failed to exempt Americans from possible prosecution.
US has at least 9000 prisoners in secret detention

3.) Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

Congressman: Muslims 'enemy amongst us'
SB 24, Ohio law to muzzle "liberals"
Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum has joined a conservative Washington think tank, where he will found and direct a program called "America's Enemies."
Sean Hannity creates weekly "Enemy of the State" segment on his new program
Fox radio hosts suggests putting liberal commentators and activists in concentration camps.
World history textbook used by seventh-graders at Scottsdale’s Mohave Middle School was pulled from classrooms mid-semester amid growing right criticism of the book’s unbiased portrayal of Islam
Rallies planned against 'Islamofacism': Event to 'unify all Americans behind common goal'

4.) Supremacy of the Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
If you haven't seen the Oreo flash animation yet, see it here

Bush’s Domestic Program Hit List

Bush slashes domestic programs, boosts defense. Arlen Spector calls it "scandalous"

Funding for job training, rural health care, low-income schools and help for people lacking health insurance would face big cuts under a bill passed Friday by the House

Pentagon to spend 75 billion for three new brigades


8 states sue Bush Administration for cuts to Children Insurance Programs
Many national parks will have to cut back on staff due to a $2.5 billion budget cut, the equivalent to one week of the Iraq war
Bush wants to cut Iraq war funding. Just kidding, he wants to cut funding for a program that gives health insurance to poor children. Governors from both parties are opposing it.
Three cable channels now feed news, information and entertainment about the armed services into millions of living rooms 24 hours a day, seven days a week: The Military Channel, the Military History Channel and the Pentagon Channel.
More...

5.) Rampant Sexism: The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
It's legal again, to fire gov't workers for being gay
Bush calls for Constitutional ban on same-sex marriages
Bush refuses to sign U.N proposal on women's "sexual" rights
W. David Hager chairman of the FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee does not prescribe contraceptives for single women, does not do abortions, will not prescribe RU-486 and will not insert IUDs.
The State Department has awarded an explicitly anti-feminist U.S. group part of a US$10 million grant to train Iraqi women in political participation and democracy.
More...

6.) Controlled Mass Media: Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
FBI Acknowledges: Journalists Phone Records are Fair Game
Report shows U.S. government has been engaged in illegal propaganda aimed at its own citizens and the story gets only 41 mentions in the media
Free Press details recent governmental propaganda efforts, from faux-correspondent Jeff Gannon to paid-off pundit Armstrong Williams, and from the demise of FOIA to video news releases passed off as news. also... See a Whitehouse fake news release here (opens realplayer)
US seizes webservers from independent media sites
Bush's war on information: US editors forbidden to publish certain foreign writers

More...

7.) Obsession with National Security: Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses
Bush Aides ADMIT 'stoking fear' for political gain: Bush adviser said the president hopes to change the dynamics of the race. The strategy is aimed at stoking public fears about terrorism, raising new concerns about Kerry's ability to protect Americans and reinforcing Bush's image as the steady anti-terrorism candidate, aides said.
The Bush administration periodically put the USA on high alert for terrorist attacks even though then-Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge argued there was only flimsy evidence to justify raising the threat level.

GOP Ad These are the stakes
Keith Olbermann: "The Nexus of Politics and Terror."
Cheney warns that if Kerry is elected, the USA will suffer a "devastating attack"
GOP convention in a nutshell (quicktime)

Rove: GOP to Use Terror As Campaign Issue in 2006
More...

8.) Religion and Government are Intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Jerry Falwell cleared of charges that he broke federal election law by urging followers to vote for Bush
NC congressman proposes law making it ok to preach politics from the pulpit
Texas Governor Mobilizes Evangelicals
Family research council: Justice Sunday
Thou shalt be like Bush: What makes this recently established, right-wing Christian college unique are the increasingly close - critics say alarmingly close - links it has with the Bush administration and the Republican establishment.
Park Service Continues to Push Creationist Theory at Grand Canyon and other nat'l parks
More...

9.) Corporate Power is Protected: The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
The K Street Project is a project by the Republican party to pressure Washington lobbying firms to hire Republicans in top positions, and to reward loyal GOP lobbyists with access to influential officials. It was launched in 1995, by Republican strategist Grover Norquist and House majority leader Tom DeLay.
American Conservative Magazine: One U.S. contractor received $2 million in a duffel bag... and a U.S. official was given $7 million in cash in the waning days of the CPA and told to spend it “before the Iraqis take over.”
There are 6 Congressional Committees investigating the Oil-for-Food (UN) scandal, yet not a single Republican Committee Chairman will call a hearing to investigate the whereabouts of 9 billion dollars missing in Iraq
Bush money network rooted in Florida, Texas: Since Mr. Bush took office in 2001, the federal government has awarded more than $3 billion in contracts to the President's elite 2004 Texas fund-raisers, their businesses, and lobbying clients
More...

10.) Labor Power is Suppressed: Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Bush vows to veto anti-terror security bill if it allows airport screeners to unionize.
Labor Department warns unions against using their money politically
President Bush Attacks Organized Labor: Bush attacked organized labor Saturday, issuing orders effectively reducing how much money unions can spend for political activities and opening up government contracts to non-union bidding.
March 2001: President Bush signed his name to four executive orders on organized labor last month, including one that cuts the money unions will have for political campaign spending.
Congress and the Department of Labor are trying to change the rules on overtime pay, eliminating the 40 hour work week, taking eligibility for overtime pay away from millions of workers, and replacing time and a half pay with comp days.
More...

11.) Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
The A to Z guide to political interference in science
Bush's new economic plan cuts funding for arts, education
Artists from all over the world are being refused entry to the US on security grounds.
A group of more than 60 top U.S. scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates and several science advisers to past Republican presidents, on Wednesday accused the Bush administration of manipulating and censoring science for political purposes
Freedom of Repression: New ruling will allow censorship of campus publications
More...

12.) Obsession with Crime and Punishment: Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations
Citizens who have done no more than criticize the president are being banned from airline flights, harassed at airports’, strip searched, roughed up and even imprisoned
The 10 most outrageous civil liberties violations of 2006
The United States has now become the world leader in its rate of incarceration, locking up its citizens at 5-8 times the rate of other industrialized nations.
American Gestapo is here: "There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the 'United States Secret Service Uniformed Division.'"
America: secret jails, secret courts, secret arrests, and now secret laws
Snitch-or-Go-to-Jail bill will make pretty much anything short of reporting on everyone you see for doing just about anything a jailable offense. With minimum sentences, up to and including life without parole.
The problem with Gonzales is that he has been deeply involved in developing some of the most sweeping claims of near-dictatorial presidential power in our nation's history, allowing him to imprison and even (at least in theory) torture anyone in the world, at any time
Police officers don't have to give a reason at the time they arrest someone, the U.S. Supreme Court said in a ruling that shields officers from false-arrest lawsuits.
More...

13.) Rampant Cronyism and Corruption: Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Bush Cronyism: Foxes Guarding the henhouse
An illustrated guide to Republican scandals
Who's been indicted, named as a co-conspirator or convicted? The Grand Ole Docket tracks trial dates, court appearances and sentencing hearings for players in the current array of national political scandals.

Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) was forced to give up his seat on the powerful committee after the FBI raided his home as part of the Abramoff scandal. To replace him, the GOP leadership tapped Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who was himself recently named one of Congress’ most corrupt lawmakers.
Making Sense of the Abramoff Scandal
In preparation for upcoming Congressional hearings, Bush Administration firing federal attorneys and appointing ringers without Senate confirmation via the patriot act.
If Bush's pick is confirmed, that will mean the five top appointees at Justice have zero prosecutorial experience among them.
Iran-Contra Felons Get Good Jobs from Bush
Big Iraq Reconstruction Contracts Went To Big Donors
Bush Wars -- Crooks Get Contracts : The main companies that were awarded billions of dollars worth of contracts in Iraq have paid more than $300 million in fines since 2000, to resolve allegations of fraud, bid rigging, delivery of faulty military equipment, and environmental damage.
US Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) lost track of $9 billion
"Contracting in the aftermath of the hurricanes has been marked by waste, corruption and cronyism"
More...

14. Fraudulent Elections: Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
A couple of election workers have been convicted of rigging a recount in Ohio following the 2004 election
Rolling Stone does some investigative and rather exhaustive digging into public documents and says we’re almost guaranteed the 2004 election results were massively rigged
Powerful Government Accounting Office report confirms key 2004 stolen election findings
Conyers hearing in which Clinton Curtis testifies that he was hired to create hackable voting machines (.wmv)
The Republican Party has quietly paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide private defense lawyers for a former Bush campaign official charged with conspiring to keep Democrats from voting in New Hampshire.
The Conyers Report (.pdf)
No explanation for the machines in Mahoning County that recorded Kerry votes for Bush, the improper purging in Cuyahoga County, the lock down in Warren County, the 99% voter turnout in Miami County, the machine tampering in Hocking County
Less access than Kazakhstan. Fewer fail-safes than Venezuela. Not as simple Republic of Georgia. The 2004 Elections according to international observers.
This picture is what stopped the ballot recounts in Florida shortly after it seemed that legitimate President Gore had a lead. The "citizens" started what was later called "the preppy riot". Screaming, yelling, pounding on the walls, these "outraged citizens" intimidated the polling officials to halt the court mandated recount. A closer look reveals who they really were. They were bussed and flown in at Republican lawmakers expense. Some even flew in on Tom Delay's private plane.

I see only 2 types pf theories represented by most bloggers, here.

Fascism from the "right".

Communism from the "left".

It is these 2 extremes that have begun to destroy the world.

Everyone on both sides seems to have an attitude of "I'm right, your wrong, and that's that!"

Follow the link below to gain an example of what the world needs, so that we may all be united in peace, freedom and prosperity.

http://www.socialistinternational.org/4Principles/dofpeng2.html

We have peace here in America with the help of Homeland Security, we live in the freest nation on earth but, we have to monitor radical jihadist Islomofascists. Our prosperity is good and are stock market proves it.
We don't need Democrat liberal socialism.
SCHIP is a bill originally passed by the Republicans.
The Dems led by Pelosi and Reid want to expand it to cover families not just poor children which the program was designed to help. Bush agreed to expand by 5 billion to insure only poor children. Then, Pelosi and Durbin added 30 billion to cover families making $82,000 + per year.
The GOP rightfully said no but, you can't say no to Nancy she's too stupid to get it.
Compromise Jackasses or you will be hurt politcally the polls cited here are all false.GOP Senators and Congress persons just need to stand their guns and to quote the liberals Move On. Jerry White, Springfield, IL

John E:

The whole premise of the “14 Points Of Fascism” is flawed. It is flawed because, its analysis, as you have so painfully illustrated, mistakenly confuses the symptoms of totalitarian fascist states with the causes of those symptoms.

Fascists never consciously followed the 14 points. They never entered their mind. Instead, fascists focused on collectivism, centralization and ultra-nationalism. It was the collectivism, centralization and ultra-nationalism which, in turn, cause those 14 Points to occur as symptoms.

The reason why fascism resorts to repressive measures, as discussed in the 14 Points, is fairly simple. The principle of “Collectivization” required the subordination of individual rights to the interests of the collective state. People, however, do not naturally adapt well to having their freedom curtailed as a result of collectivization, so they dissented and rebelled. This was intolerable to the collective fascist state – because individualism and rebellion are antithetical to group thinking and the efficiency of the collective “people” (or “Volk” in Hitler’s terminology). Thus, a strong permanent leadership deployed force to either eliminate or correct those who strayed from the fold. Those strong men resort to measures such as censorship and control of mass media and the arts, disregard for human rights, assimilation of trade unions, harsh punitive measures, and so on, as the means of controlling and maintaining the people in the collective.

What causes the balance of the symptoms is the fact that fascist collectivization focuses on ultra-nationalism as a unifying principle. It was because the German “Volk” were superior that they were entitled to throw of the bonds of the Versailles Treaty and conquer their neighbors. It was because the Italians were the rightful owners of the “Roman Empire” that they were to conquer the Mediterranean regions of Europe and Africa – and so on. Of course, being “one people” in a nationalistic, collective sense meant they couldn’t tolerate the equal participation of any inferior races like Slavs, Jews or Gypsies. Thus, it was the ultra-nationalist aspect of fascism that resulted in such phenomena as the creation of scapegoats, outcasts, and the emphasis on national security and military might.

Furthermore, some of the factual assertions of the “14 Points Of Fascism” are simply untrue. It is not correct, for instance, to suggest that fascists hated all intellectuals, academics, artists and the like. To the contrary, they had their own movie directors, stars, singers, artists, and so on – to promote fascist ideology. Movies, music, poetry and novels made for wonderful propaganda. The same was true of academics. Martin Heidegger, for instance, was a very important philosopher and intellectual, and his works are still considered valuable in the field of philosophy. However, he was fully tolerated – and even promoted – because he was a spokesman for National Socialism.

Nor is it true that corporate power was particularly protected. Nazi thinking, in particular, had a rather strong anti-capitalist strain. The capitalists, and especially the financiers (read “international Jews”) were blamed for the betrayal and downfall of Germany in World War I. Thus, the Nazis maintained a policy against speculation and all “unearned” income. Thus, corporate capitalism was permitted only to the degree that it benefitted the community (e.g. the “collective”) before it could benefit the individual.

The process of collectivization drew both corporate and labor interests into the same pot. Both became responsible for the collective good of the people. Workers were expected to devote their labor to the common good, for which the State would reciprocate with support. The Corporations were permitted broader control over their workers, but were still expected by the Nazis to devote their output – and particularly their military output - to support the people. The State, in effect, became “the” labor union – as it required certain concessions from businesses regarding wage and working conditions. The state also determined the profits the corporations could make. The corporations had no choice but to comply with all of this because their existence depended entirely on the patronage of the fascist state.

Nor, for that matter, was it universally true that Religion and government were intertwined. The Italian fascist state had, at best, an uneasy truce with the Catholic Church – which ended when the Catholic Church turned against Mussolini. The same is true with the Catholic and Evangelical Churches in Germany and occupied Europe. In general, the Nazi’s tried to infiltrate and co-opt churches, but they ended up persecuting them instead when those churches refused to support fascism. Only Franco’s Spanish fascists had the full backing of the Catholic Church – and only because Franco protected the Catholic Church from Marxist-socialists, communists and anarchists during their civil war from 1937-1939.

So, John, your understanding of fascism, based on the “14 Points” is rather flawed. Fascism was, as I said, a socialist (i.e. collective & centralized) ultra-nationalistic movement. The symptoms you describe and pathetically attempt to apply to the Republicans do not represent the essence of fascism but, rather, the symptoms of its illness.

I also stand by my definition of socialism and my application of it to the trends promoted by the Democratic Party. The idea of collectivization and centralization in everything from Health Care to the rest of the Welfare State – is plainly socialism. I am sorry for you that you don’t like the fact that what the Democrats are doing actually matches the definition of socialism – but it is true.

BTW, I don’t practice law in Nevada – thank God – and I have no interest in making any exceptions for has-been football players. So O.J. is SOL as far as I am concerned.

Posted by: Bruce | October 18, 2007 5:36 PM

Well, YOU never get tired of being wrong, or tired of posting the usual anti-Democratic politician whine.

[quote]
I am against it even if it is only for families that earn $63K a year. Posted by: John W. | October 18, 2007 8:09 PM
[/quote]

Well, you must be for it for families that earn over $160,000 annually. Because every member of Congress, every Cabinet member, every head of a government department and their top level management - all of them make around this number or more, and all of them get government paid health care that has no deductibles or copays. In fact, you're supporting "socialist" medical care for over 3 million Americans not names above: the members of the American military. And some fo those generals make over $125,000 annually. Many of them can afford to pay for their own health care, but you're paying it for them instead.

*****
Posted by: BC | October 20, 2007 5:13 PM

BC:

Please get with it. I am against helping anyone who doesn't need help – which is to say those who aren't poor. A person making 63k a year isn't poor.

Congressmen and the President, like most other federal employees, get health care as part of their pay package. That is, they earn it by working for a living.

The same is true of people in the armed forces. They enlist and re-enlist with the expectation that these services will be provided for them as part of their compensation. It's the least we can do for most of them, as many of them face so much danger, yet earn so little for their service that their families collect public assistance.

None of the above is socialism because none of it involves collectivization and centralization. Please remember that socialism, at a minimum, requires the elements of 1) collectivization of the people , and 2) centralization of resources and power. So, please learn to draw a few rational distinctions and stop pelting me with nonsense like this.