"President Bush discussing children's health care at a press conference is a little like John Wayne Gacy giving a seminar on proper party clown technique."
The Rude Pundit on Dubya's explanation for why he will veto a bill that extends health care coverage to 4 million children who are presently without it and whose families can't afford to pay for it. A bill that will cost $34 billion over five years vs. the $12 billion A MONTH presently being spent as ego gratification for an insane president.
See, here's the deal: if you're a republicrook or so called libertarian who believes government programs are bad or that governenment simply doesn't work as well as the "Free Market" then it's better that four million children go without any healthcare whatsoever than to extend a government subsidy to their families thus guaranteeing their kids get some sort of coverage however basic.
In the world of today's republican/libertarian it's always better to let sick children get sicker or even die than to do something that might demonstrate that government can actually work for the people that it's intended to work for.
I guess my only question is, if the government isn't going to be allowed to help those four million children then who or what in the almighty "Free Market" was planning on providing those kids healthcare?