jasonxctf Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 http://news.aol.com/story/ar/_a/hurt-boy-a...S00010000000001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 This is pure bulls***, on both sides. First of all, the sentance in his speech about "I just want people to get taken care of like I was under the program" - what crap. Listen, a kid in his exact same situation WOULD BE UNDER THE NEW BILL. Second of all, the expansion of the program is nuts as it is currently written, but then the Dems get to play "Bush is a peckerhead who hates kids". Third of all, the wacko right wing nutball screwtards need to STFU, but it's too late for that. The point remains: yea, these people have money, and yes, they chose to tie it up in non-monetary assets in leiu of getting insurance for their families - which is what made them eligible for SCHIP in the first place. Fine, people do it all the time - but remember, it's a choice. The kid got his care, and that's good, but the politics on both sides trying to smear each other is pure horses***. /waits for the incredible defense of all things Democrat BTW, this is discussed in the Dem only thread, but it's probably a good one to split off anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Shouldn't the "first of all" be, WTF kind of people decide its acceptable to threaten a kid's life, to make their point? I seriously would like to see the authorities find the poster who threatened the kid with hanging, and prosecute him/her for assault on a child. I am pretty sure that a threat to hang qualifies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 10:39 PM) Shouldn't the "first of all" be, WTF kind of people decide its acceptable to threaten a kid's life, to make their point? I seriously would like to see the authorities find the poster who threatened the kid with hanging, and prosecute him/her for assault on a child. I am pretty sure that a threat to hang qualifies. That's not in this article. I hadn't seen that. People are idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 04:44 PM) That's not in this article. I hadn't seen that. People are idiots. Oh, sorry, that was in the other thread. Some blogger said the kid should be hung in public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 10:45 PM) Oh, sorry, that was in the other thread. Some blogger said the kid should be hung in public. I missed that part. That is so insane. That's what gives "conservatives" a bad name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 IIRC, on FreeRepublic, they also posted the family's home address and phone number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 I was under the impression that the family wasn't, say, spending all that money on their private schooling and were in fact almost entirely covered by scholarship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 12:36 AM) IIRC, on FreeRepublic, they also posted the family's home address and phone number. Sorry, it was just their address. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 09:38 PM) I was under the impression that the family wasn't, say, spending all that money on their private schooling and were in fact almost entirely covered by scholarship? That is correct. The state is covering that part, in large part because of the injuries the kids suffered in the auto accident and the fact that the school is good @ dealing with those problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts