The day in politics
Sheriff Leis wins a round over the sales tax. Story here
Jessica Brown looks into Hamilton County's tax abatement program. Story here.
And some City Council candidates single out some parades for subsidies. Jane Prendergast has that story here
17 Comments:
at 12:35 PM, October 05, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:50 PM, October 05, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:31 PM, October 05, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3:29 PM, October 05, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 5:46 PM, October 05, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 5:56 PM, October 05, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:33 AM, October 06, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:45 PM, October 06, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 1:58 PM, October 06, 2007 
usefullidiot said...
-
-
at 6:42 PM, October 06, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 7:04 PM, October 06, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:39 PM, October 07, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:24 PM, October 07, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:27 AM, October 08, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:22 PM, October 08, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 6:19 PM, October 08, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:45 PM, October 09, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*Here are a couple of good comic strips about SCHIP, from Tom Toles and Jeff Danziger.
Larry Craig Will try to seek support and a vote of confidence from "Bold Endeavors".
Monzel wants to fund parades and not health clinincs and swimming pools? What kind of values are these?
They didn't mind coughing up $30 million for a new parking garage for Corporex did they?
Long live the Findlay Market Parade! Thank you Chris Monzel!!
Today's New York Times has a great editorial about SCHIP:
Trying to justify his ideologically driven veto of a bill to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, President Bush and his staff have fired a barrage of misinformation about this valuable program. Before the House votes on whether to override the veto, all members — especially those from Mr. Bush’s party who say they are concerned about millions of uninsured children — must look behind the rhetoric.
...The bill primarily reflects a Senate version that was drafted with great care by key members of both parties. It embodies principles that would normally appeal to many conservatives. S-chip is not an entitlement program like Medicare or Medicaid. Instead, it provides block grants to the states, which can curtail enrollment if funds run out. Nor is S-chip permanent. It will need to be reauthorized again in five years, at which time some future Congress and president will be free to have another slugfest. The White House declined overtures to join in consultations while the bill was being framed, according to Senator Charles Grassley, a Republican sponsor. Like so many other things that Mr. Bush has gotten disastrously wrong, he’d already made up his mind and had no interest in listening to others’ arguments.
Now it is up to Congress to show Mr. Bush that such blind partisanship will not be rewarded. For the sake of America’s children, lawmakers must override the veto.
Jean Schmidt and Steve Chabot need to do the right thing and vote to override Bush's veto. Tell them to stop playing politics with the health of uninsured kids.
There's a great new ad about SCHIP. Check it out.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE AD
Help end the violence...vote yes on issue 27!
Check this out, from Rasmussen Reports:
Sixty-five percent (65%) of American voters know that President Bush vetoed a bill expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 8% mistakenly thought the President signed the bill while the rest were not sure.
Of those who knew of the veto, 57% disapproved and 31% supported the President’s action.
Jean Schmidt and Steve Chabot have already voted against the children's health insurance bill once. Tell them to do the right thing and override Bush's veto.
Is it possible that the “nay” votes were for the `Small Business Tax Relief Act of 2007'. Which in reality reverses provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax relief for small businesses, and for other purposes. Dirty business as usual for the Dhmmicrats, and a big victory for their mega-corporate puppet-masters, almost.
Jon Stewart had a great piece about SCHIP on Thursday's "Daily Show."
CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE DAILY SHOW CLIP
I wonder if hose polled knew that "poor" in this case covered families making up to $85,000 per year with their "children" up to age 25. Somehow, I bet that was left out of the DNC talking points the news media likes to pretend are their own news stories.
I wonder if hose polled knew that "poor" in this case covered families making up to $85,000 per year
For crying out loud, talking about your partisan talking points. Here's what the nonpartisan FactCheck.org had to say on that subject:
The president repeated a false charge that has been bandied about by the administration and other Republicans:
Bush: "Their proposal would result in taking a program meant to help poor children and turning it into one that covers children in households with incomes of up to $83,000 a year."
In fact, nothing in either the House or Senate bill would force coverage for families earning $83,000 a year. That's already possible under current law, but no state sets its cut-off that high for a family of four and the bill contains no requirement for any such increase. The Bush administration, in fact, just denied a request by New York to set its income cut-off at $82,600 for a family of four, a move New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer and members of Congress from the state have vigorously protested. And Bush would retain the authority to deny similar applications under the proposed legislation. An Aug. 17 letter to state health officials from the Center on Medicare and Medicaid Services outlined new guidelines for states that would make it quite difficult for states to raise eligibility above 250 percent of the federal poverty level ($51,625 for a family of four). So Bush is simply wrong to say that the legislation "would" result in families making $83,000 a year to be eligible. It might happen in a future administration, but that would be possible without the new legislation.
By the way, be sure to check out Mike Luckovich's recent SCHIP comic.
And tell Jean Schmidt & Steve Chabot to pass the children's health insurance bill.
Why is it that the Enquirer never reports on any of the shady stuff that John Boehner does? Such as this, from Robert Novak:
In a secret meeting Wednesday of the House Republican leadership, Minority Leader John Boehner ruled that Rep. Jerry Lewis of California will continue as the party's ranking member of the Appropriations Committee while under federal investigation on ethics charges.
That widened the gap between Boehner and reform-minded House Republicans, including members of the leadership. Under investigation for sponsoring questionable earmarks, Lewis remains a major Republican spokesman in Congress. He led the Republican debate Wednesday on Democratic procedures for handling President Bush's veto of the expanded State Children's Health Insurance Program.
Republican reformers complain that Boehner imposes a double standard that is harsher on rank-and-file members of Congress than on leaders. While Lewis keeps his leadership position on Appropriations, Rep. John Doolittle left the committee in April because he is a federal corruption target.
Heh, heh, heh, go read Nate Livingston's blog to watch the right-wing, left-wing anti-public-safety clowns start sniping at each other. At issue is whether or not that side of the issue is doing anything to reach absentee voters, normally a cut-and-dry question.
I think both Nate and Jason flunked Politics 101 and Nate certainly needs a refresher course at charm school. Even a "treat other people like human beings" school would be an improvement for him.
But, really, you have to read it to fully appreciate Nate going all Dick Cheney/ George Bush on Jason Gloyd.
Does anyone seriously think that Nadel would EVER rule against Leis?
Nadel still wears Leis for Sheriff T-Shirts around town.
Nadel & Leis, boyfriends or just bffs forever.
How about checking out Ron Paul for President? The Republicans really aren't Republcans any more. They are fiscally irresponsible big spenders. The Republican congress we just voted out and GWB INCREASED discretionary, non-military spending more than any group since FDR in the 1930's. Are they really democrats?
Ron Paul for President!
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home