G.O.P. Presidential Contenders Endorse Health Insurance Veto

[DeepModem Mom]

Source: New York Times

By PATRICK HEALY
Published: October 5, 2007

The four leading Republican presidential candidates have aligned themselves with President Bush’s veto on Wednesday of an expanded health insurance program for children, once again testing the political risk of appearing in lock step with a president who has low approval ratings and some critics of the veto within their party.

It is yet another issue — like the Iraq war, North Korea’s nuclear program and the management of the federal response to Hurricane Katrina — where the Republican contenders are treading delicately as they gauge how to position themselves with an unpopular president on contentious issues. While all four are defending the veto, some in full-throated language, the candidates are at the same time forgoing praise of Mr. Bush’s judgment on the issue or of his leadership in general.

The candidates’ embrace of the veto puts them in closer step with Mr. Bush, however, than they have been on some other major issues; former Gov. Mitt Romney, for instance, has warned the United States against becoming overly trusting of North Korea’s promise to dismantle its nuclear program. Some of the Republicans have also avoided sounding as optimistic as Mr. Bush about Iraq’s future. And Senator John McCain of Arizona, among others, has assailed the administration’s competence on both Iraq strategy and the federal response to Hurricane Katrina.

As for the children’s insurance veto, the candidates, in aligning with Mr. Bush, are mindful of the concerns of fiscal conservatives that expanding the program could result in huge future costs. Unlike with Iraq or Hurricane Katrina, Mr. Bush’s capacity to be a drag on the candidates’ fortunes is smaller on the insurance veto, Republican analysts say, because the veto is not especially unpopular with Republican primary voters. They are the current target audience for the candidates, according to their campaign advisers, so the electoral gamble of supporting the veto — if not Mr. Bush — is relatively modest at this point....

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/washington/05insure.html?hp

[Mojorabbit]

1. I think they are wrong

and making a big mistake. Things are getting pretty bad out there economically and are going to get worse. Budgets are stretched tight. People will remember this. The polls show most want the veto overridden.

[Kiouni]

2. Kucinich didn't support this bill either. N/T

[tnlurker]

16. Kucinich did not support the bill because

It did not go far enough. He wanted all children covered. He wants all Americans covered.

[obiwan]

3. Right. We can spend 2 billion a week on the Iraq war...

...but we can't spend 7 billion a year on our children? Pretzel logic at its finest.

RIP, GOP.

[Cobalt-60]

4. keep the spotlight on them!

I wondered how I would bring about the demise of the hated beast we call the Republican Party.
Who knew they would commit suicide on their own?

[mwb970]

15. It reminds me of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

It wasn't Holy St. Ronald who caused its demise, it simply collapsed under the weight of its unsustainable stance and policies. Sound familiar?

The modern Republican party is a despicable, un-American criminal enterprise. Their fall from power will be welcomed throughout the world. Good riddance to truly bad rubbish.

[FloridaJudy]

5. Their masks have dropped

And their fangs are showing. So much for "compassionate conservatism"

Fifth rec. Off to the greatest with you.

[killbotfactory]

6. They really don't want to win, do they?

[City Lights]

13. They don't want to clean up Georgie's mess.

And by leaving it for a Dem to clean up, they'll manage to find a way to shift some of the blame for the mess onto the Dems.

They suck.

[Mojambo]

7. I can't imagine a better scenario.

This legislation is enormously popular with the American people.

This is a general election gift to the Democrats.

Awesome.

[comtec]

8. Who of teh candidates say the VEOT is good?

I have a lady over at Expatica that is googy for Ron Paul.
I'd love to shove this in her face... along with some inconvenient facts :)

That said.. christ on a crutch! what evil, sadistic, blood loving monster hates kids!?!?!... oh.. wait.. *slaps forehead* DUH.. LOL right, my bad. WHAT was I thinking.. Humanity? compassion? LOL... sorry I just can't help but laugh at myself for having POSITIVE expectation of the gop, especially this monster in office.

So whose betting on the gop in the House preventing a veto overturn?

[Dolly Llama]

9. Political Criminals

These political criminals have golden health insurance and retirement benefits. Paid for by American working citizens. They are insensitive louts who care about lining their pockets and reducing the American Citizen to serfdom.

[stlsaxman]

10. Absolutely correct! Welcome to DU!

:hi:

p.s. you any relation to El Salvidor Rag Dali Llama?

[DeepModem Mom]

17. Indeed, Dolly Llama -- welcome to DU!

[annabanana]

11. Tell me that's not a "Republican friendly" headline. .

the words "endorse", "health", and "insurance" all in a row like that just give you the subliminal warm & fuzzies all over the place...

Nice try, NYT. . You don't fool me for a NY minute!

[Vinca]

12. Good point. It makes them sound noble for backing up

the White House criminal.

[tblue37]

14. Pay for Blackwater & Halliburton, but not children's health. That's a pretty

stark contrast.

[damntexdem]

18. Are they crazy? Or do they just have to act stupid to get the nomination?

This is one that should really bite the GOPers in 2008.