*Loan,banking and credit>>>state insurance

Why does President Bush oppose an expansion of State Childrens Health Insurance Program for poor children?

"President Bush has threatened to veto bipartisan Senate legislation that would increase SCHIP funding by $35 billion over five years. Almost two-thirds of voters surveyed late last week said they think the President would be doing the wrong thing if he vetoed the legislation."

Funds would come from an increase in the tobacco tax.

Bush is a neocon Republican. Two reasons for vetoing shuch good legislation. It takes progressives to get such things done. It always had and always will. Vote Democratic for both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue and we will see it and other progressive programs pass for the betterment of all of us as in the past.

Good one. BRB with answer.

I just did an answer including the 14 Main points of Fascism. Let me print one of the points. AH heck, let me print the whole thing! LOL.

14 POINTS OF FASCISM

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism ~ From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights ~ The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause ~ The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people鈥檚 attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice鈥攔elentless propaganda and disinformation鈥攚ere usually effective. Often the regimes would incite 鈥渟pontaneous鈥?acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and 鈥渢errorists.鈥?Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism ~ Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

5. Rampant sexism ~ Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

6. A controlled mass media ~ Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes鈥?excesses.

7. Obsession with national security ~ Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting 鈥渘ational security,鈥?and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together ~ Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite鈥檚 behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the 鈥済odless.鈥?A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

9. Power of corporations protected ~ Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of 鈥渉ave-not鈥?citizens.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated ~ Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts ~ Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment ~ Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. 鈥淣ormal鈥?and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or 鈥渢raitors鈥?was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption ~ Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

14. Fraudulent elections ~ Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

NOTE: The above 14 Points was written in 2004 by Dr. Laurence Britt, a political scientist. Dr. Britt studied the fascist regimes of: Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile). Please add Bush (USA) to the list now.

Note Points 4, 5, 9, 11 and you will get the idea.

NOW watch this wonderful video by Gerry of Tom and Gerry's and see how things COULD be handled with everyone coming out ahead ... well except for the war machine who just does not want to share at all!... Nothing like Oreo cookies to show the true condition of our international agenda!

http://www.truemajority.org/fun/...
Let me add, since the Democrats and the Republicans are the two sides of the same lying coin, since money is the bottom line for them all, since they serve the same Masters, since they FAKE political differences to the people, it would not matter WHO is in power in the long run. It is just that Bush was groomed for the job from the day he was born. But, it does not matter, they all follow the same line of the wealthy.

When Marie Antoinette said, "Let them eat cake" she was at least feeding the poor.

Bush and Cheney say, "Crumbs from OUR cake? They will cost you your unborn children and your soul for a few swept off OUR table!"
Umm...good question! Why does he do a lot of things he does?
Bush hates children, black people, women, and everyone else who isn't a white man. His goal is to eliminate everyone except white men from the planet. this is his evil master plan and he must be stopped!
The taxes are outrageous. The program is already well funded and more funds will only grow socialism and dependence. The Program allows anyone making less than double the state poverty limit i.e. Texas is 42,000 yr income to qualify for this program. That is ridiculous. Good for the President to stop this.
One, it's a tax increase, which should always be viewed with skepticism. Secondly, wait for it.... wait for it.... the STATES deal with it! Why does everyone constantly insist that the Federal Government needs to stick it's nose into these State programs? Here in Indiana we have Hoosier Healthwise, which covers all dependent children under 18 if their parents can't afford insurance. The State funds it, so why does the government need to send them any money?